<?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 1185 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428240</link>
    <description>The Tribunal quashed the order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CIT) under section 263, holding that the Assessing Officer (AO) had taken a permissible view based on the facts presented by the assessee. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, determining that the Pr. CIT erred in assuming jurisdiction and setting aside the assessment order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2022 07:17:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=691872" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 1185 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428240</link>
      <description>The Tribunal quashed the order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CIT) under section 263, holding that the Assessing Officer (AO) had taken a permissible view based on the facts presented by the assessee. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, determining that the Pr. CIT erred in assuming jurisdiction and setting aside the assessment order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428240</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>