<?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>2023 (1) TMI 178 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432431</link>
    <description>The High Court held that the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) had the jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to revise the assessment. The Court determined that the orders passed by the Assessing Officer were erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue&#039;s interests. The CIT&#039;s power to revise the assessment was deemed appropriate, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant revenue without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Jun 2023 15:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=700743" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (1) TMI 178 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432431</link>
      <description>The High Court held that the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) had the jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to revise the assessment. The Court determined that the orders passed by the Assessing Officer were erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue&#039;s interests. The CIT&#039;s power to revise the assessment was deemed appropriate, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant revenue without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432431</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>