<?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>2018 (5) TMI 2056 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294687</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax&#039;s order under Section 263, finding that the Assessing Officer had failed to consider crucial facts impacting the assessment. The Tribunal deemed the invocation of jurisdiction appropriate based on legal decisions, dismissing the appeals but directing a re-examination of the issues with a fair hearing for the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2021 11:51:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=642919" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 2056 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294687</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax&#039;s order under Section 263, finding that the Assessing Officer had failed to consider crucial facts impacting the assessment. The Tribunal deemed the invocation of jurisdiction appropriate based on legal decisions, dismissing the appeals but directing a re-examination of the issues with a fair hearing for the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294687</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>