<?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 1004 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412659</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, setting aside the Tribunal&#039;s order and restoring the order of the CIT(A). The Court emphasized that the Tribunal should have acted with greater circumspection and not remanded the matter without proper justification. The decision highlighted the importance of the initial burden of proof resting with the assessee and the necessity for the Tribunal to provide reasons for remanding cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Dec 2021 17:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=656641" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (9) TMI 1004 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412659</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, setting aside the Tribunal&#039;s order and restoring the order of the CIT(A). The Court emphasized that the Tribunal should have acted with greater circumspection and not remanded the matter without proper justification. The decision highlighted the importance of the initial burden of proof resting with the assessee and the necessity for the Tribunal to provide reasons for remanding cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412659</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>