<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (4) TMI 64 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377620</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the Commissioner erred in exercising revisional powers under Section 263 as the assessment order had merged with the appellate order, and the Assessing Officer had considered the proviso to Section 2(15). The Tribunal&#039;s decision was upheld, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2022 16:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=565041" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 64 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377620</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the Commissioner erred in exercising revisional powers under Section 263 as the assessment order had merged with the appellate order, and the Assessing Officer had considered the proviso to Section 2(15). The Tribunal&#039;s decision was upheld, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377620</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>