<?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>2016 (8) TMI 1587 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306997</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant fulfilled tax payment requirements on the admitted income, not obligated to pay on the revised return. The CIT(Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal based on non-payment for the revised return, directing a reevaluation on merits. The Tribunal clarified the non-validity of the revised return under section 153C, emphasizing the original return&#039;s treatment. The Tribunal criticized the CIT(Appeals) for dismissing the appeal without considering merits, allowing the appeal for statistical purposes. The judgment emphasized tax payment on admitted income, clarified revised return treatment, and stressed thorough consideration of merits in appeal proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Mar 2023 10:11:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=707435" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 1587 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306997</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant fulfilled tax payment requirements on the admitted income, not obligated to pay on the revised return. The CIT(Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal based on non-payment for the revised return, directing a reevaluation on merits. The Tribunal clarified the non-validity of the revised return under section 153C, emphasizing the original return&#039;s treatment. The Tribunal criticized the CIT(Appeals) for dismissing the appeal without considering merits, allowing the appeal for statistical purposes. The judgment emphasized tax payment on admitted income, clarified revised return treatment, and stressed thorough consideration of merits in appeal proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306997</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>