<?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 (4) TMI 947 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436921</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax&#039;s decision to assume jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, based on the incorrect application of section 2(22)(e) regarding deemed dividends. The Tribunal emphasized that when multiple interpretations are possible, jurisdiction under section 263 is not justified. The assessing officer&#039;s order was reinstated, and all appeals favored the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Apr 2023 10:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=711582" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (4) TMI 947 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436921</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax&#039;s decision to assume jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, based on the incorrect application of section 2(22)(e) regarding deemed dividends. The Tribunal emphasized that when multiple interpretations are possible, jurisdiction under section 263 is not justified. The assessing officer&#039;s order was reinstated, and all appeals favored the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436921</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>