<?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 (10) TMI 178 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413126</link>
    <description>A revisional authority under Section 264 of the Income-tax Act must pass a reasoned order after considering the material and granting an opportunity of hearing. An order that declines relief without dealing with the merits, and relies only on the availability of a departmental remedy against an ITAT decision, does not show application of mind. The impugned revisional order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2021 21:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=657687" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (10) TMI 178 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413126</link>
      <description>A revisional authority under Section 264 of the Income-tax Act must pass a reasoned order after considering the material and granting an opportunity of hearing. An order that declines relief without dealing with the merits, and relies only on the availability of a departmental remedy against an ITAT decision, does not show application of mind. The impugned revisional order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413126</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>