<?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>2022 (5) TMI 541 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422281</link>
    <description>The appellate tribunal, comprising Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President, and Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member, analyzed the issues raised by the appellant against the order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kolkata under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found the appellant&#039;s contentions regarding lack of application of mind and initiation of proceedings based on audit objections to be unsubstantiated. Regarding the assessment order under section 143(3), the Tribunal held that the PCIT&#039;s revisionary jurisdiction was not valid. Consequently, the tribunal allowed the appeal, quashing the order passed under section 263 of the Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 May 2022 08:46:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=678886" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (5) TMI 541 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422281</link>
      <description>The appellate tribunal, comprising Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President, and Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member, analyzed the issues raised by the appellant against the order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kolkata under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found the appellant&#039;s contentions regarding lack of application of mind and initiation of proceedings based on audit objections to be unsubstantiated. Regarding the assessment order under section 143(3), the Tribunal held that the PCIT&#039;s revisionary jurisdiction was not valid. Consequently, the tribunal allowed the appeal, quashing the order passed under section 263 of the Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422281</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>