<?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 (3) TMI 985 - ITAT SURAT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435599</link>
    <description>The Tribunal granted the assessee additional opportunities to contest the case on merit, emphasizing the principles of natural justice. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision regarding the re-opening of assessment u/s 147. The Tribunal also directed a reconsideration of reassessment proceedings u/s 148 due to valuation issues and declined exemption under sections 54/54F. The CIT(A) was instructed to provide reasonable opportunities to the assessee for valuation and LTCG computation, and both parties were advised to enhance compliance vigilance for penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c). The CIT(A) was criticized for lack of adequate hearing opportunities, prompting the Tribunal to allow the appeals for statistical purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2023 08:28:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=708451" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (3) TMI 985 - ITAT SURAT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435599</link>
      <description>The Tribunal granted the assessee additional opportunities to contest the case on merit, emphasizing the principles of natural justice. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision regarding the re-opening of assessment u/s 147. The Tribunal also directed a reconsideration of reassessment proceedings u/s 148 due to valuation issues and declined exemption under sections 54/54F. The CIT(A) was instructed to provide reasonable opportunities to the assessee for valuation and LTCG computation, and both parties were advised to enhance compliance vigilance for penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c). The CIT(A) was criticized for lack of adequate hearing opportunities, prompting the Tribunal to allow the appeals for statistical purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435599</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>