<?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>2011 (10) TMI 772 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304197</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the Commissioner of Income Tax erred in assuming jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act based on a single issue raised post-audit objection, which the Assessing Officer had already considered. The Tribunal found that the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer should have merged with the original assessment order, leading to the allowance of the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2022 10:44:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=690573" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (10) TMI 772 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304197</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the Commissioner of Income Tax erred in assuming jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act based on a single issue raised post-audit objection, which the Assessing Officer had already considered. The Tribunal found that the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer should have merged with the original assessment order, leading to the allowance of the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304197</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>