<?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>2016 (11) TMI 1720 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302711</link>
    <description>The Tribunal concluded that the CIT(A) should decide the issues himself after obtaining a remand report from the AO if necessary. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision, ensuring compliance with the legal provisions and giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard. The appeals by both the assessee and the revenue were allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Jun 2022 20:44:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=681939" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 1720 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302711</link>
      <description>The Tribunal concluded that the CIT(A) should decide the issues himself after obtaining a remand report from the AO if necessary. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision, ensuring compliance with the legal provisions and giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard. The appeals by both the assessee and the revenue were allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302711</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>