<?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>2012 (1) TMI 384 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287442</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal of the assessee, emphasizing the importance of providing reasons for reopening assessments. The case was remanded back to the AO for further proceedings in compliance with the directions given by the ITAT, which included providing the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment and passing a speaking order after considering the assessee&#039;s objections. The ITAT highlighted the need to address jurisdictional issues before deciding on quantum additions, in line with legal precedents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2020 18:07:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=610214" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (1) TMI 384 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287442</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal of the assessee, emphasizing the importance of providing reasons for reopening assessments. The case was remanded back to the AO for further proceedings in compliance with the directions given by the ITAT, which included providing the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment and passing a speaking order after considering the assessee&#039;s objections. The ITAT highlighted the need to address jurisdictional issues before deciding on quantum additions, in line with legal precedents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287442</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>