<?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 (9) TMI 1177 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428232</link>
    <description>The tribunal concluded that the assessment order was invalid due to jurisdictional errors in the issuance of notice under Section 143(2) and the absence of a notice by the jurisdictional AO. As a result, the assessment order was quashed, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed. Other issues raised were not addressed due to the primary grounds of jurisdictional defects. The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the assessment order under Section 143(3) was quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2022 09:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=691864" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 1177 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428232</link>
      <description>The tribunal concluded that the assessment order was invalid due to jurisdictional errors in the issuance of notice under Section 143(2) and the absence of a notice by the jurisdictional AO. As a result, the assessment order was quashed, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed. Other issues raised were not addressed due to the primary grounds of jurisdictional defects. The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the assessment order under Section 143(3) was quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428232</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>