<?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>2020 (5) TMI 296 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395263</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Miscellaneous Application seeking a review of its ex-parte order under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The application lacked merit as no apparent mistake was found in the original order. The Tribunal emphasized the limited scope of rectification under section 254(2) and upheld its original decision, emphasizing the importance of rectifying only apparent errors in the record, not reviewing judgments beyond the specified scope.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 May 2020 13:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=612883" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (5) TMI 296 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395263</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Miscellaneous Application seeking a review of its ex-parte order under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The application lacked merit as no apparent mistake was found in the original order. The Tribunal emphasized the limited scope of rectification under section 254(2) and upheld its original decision, emphasizing the importance of rectifying only apparent errors in the record, not reviewing judgments beyond the specified scope.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395263</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>