<?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>1998 (10) TMI 552 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283919</link>
    <description>An application for additional evidence under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules was integral to the appeal and had to be decided before the Tribunal examined the merits. Disposing of the appeal without first ruling on that application was procedurally unsustainable. The proper course was to decide the Rule 29 request on merits and then hear the appeal. The order disposing of the appeal was set aside and the matter remitted to the Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2025 13:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=591504" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (10) TMI 552 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283919</link>
      <description>An application for additional evidence under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules was integral to the appeal and had to be decided before the Tribunal examined the merits. Disposing of the appeal without first ruling on that application was procedurally unsustainable. The proper course was to decide the Rule 29 request on merits and then hear the appeal. The order disposing of the appeal was set aside and the matter remitted to the Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283919</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>