<?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>2011 (1) TMI 1564 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296065</link>
    <description>Appeals were treated as unadmitted and dismissed for non-prosecution under Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules because none of the assessees or their representatives appeared despite notice. The Tribunal applied its procedural power to dispose of the matters for default of appearance, but preserved a remedial route by granting liberty to seek recall of the dismissal order on a satisfactory explanation for the non-compliance. If the explanation is accepted, the order may be recalled.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Jul 2021 11:42:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=648474" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (1) TMI 1564 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296065</link>
      <description>Appeals were treated as unadmitted and dismissed for non-prosecution under Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules because none of the assessees or their representatives appeared despite notice. The Tribunal applied its procedural power to dispose of the matters for default of appearance, but preserved a remedial route by granting liberty to seek recall of the dismissal order on a satisfactory explanation for the non-compliance. If the explanation is accepted, the order may be recalled.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296065</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>