<?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>2021 (9) TMI 14 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411669</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal for reconsideration as it found errors in not referring the property valuation to the departmental valuation officer under Section 50C(2) as requested by the appellant. The AO and CIT(A) failed to comply with the statutory provision, leading to the appeal being set aside for reassessment to ensure proper valuation procedures are followed in accordance with the Income Tax Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2021 22:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=654430" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (9) TMI 14 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411669</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal for reconsideration as it found errors in not referring the property valuation to the departmental valuation officer under Section 50C(2) as requested by the appellant. The AO and CIT(A) failed to comply with the statutory provision, leading to the appeal being set aside for reassessment to ensure proper valuation procedures are followed in accordance with the Income Tax Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411669</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>