<?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 (7) TMI 891 - ITAT CUTTACK</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425336</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals against orders passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act for assessment years 2015-2016 and 2017-2018. The delay in filing one appeal was condoned, and both appeals were heard together. The ITAT found no violation of Section 11(6) regarding depreciation and capital expenditure, quashing the orders of the ld. CIT(E) and allowing both appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2022 09:27:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=685641" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (7) TMI 891 - ITAT CUTTACK</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425336</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals against orders passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act for assessment years 2015-2016 and 2017-2018. The delay in filing one appeal was condoned, and both appeals were heard together. The ITAT found no violation of Section 11(6) regarding depreciation and capital expenditure, quashing the orders of the ld. CIT(E) and allowing both appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425336</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>