<?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 1298 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425743</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, quashing the revision order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The tribunal held that the PCIT erred in invoking revisionary jurisdiction as the assumption of jurisdiction was based on incorrect facts, and the assessee had duly satisfied the necessary requirements under Section 68 of the Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Jul 2022 08:29:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=686521" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (7) TMI 1298 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425743</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, quashing the revision order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The tribunal held that the PCIT erred in invoking revisionary jurisdiction as the assumption of jurisdiction was based on incorrect facts, and the assessee had duly satisfied the necessary requirements under Section 68 of the Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425743</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>