<?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>2013 (8) TMI 1179 - ITAT LUCKNOW</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309242</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, deleting the income enhancement made by the CIT(A) due to lack of opportunity provided to the appellant. Other grounds raised, including alleged concealment of income, reliance on incorrect case law, distinction between revised and corrected return, and lack of notice for income enhancement, were considered irrelevant and rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Aug 2023 13:31:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=723117" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (8) TMI 1179 - ITAT LUCKNOW</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309242</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, deleting the income enhancement made by the CIT(A) due to lack of opportunity provided to the appellant. Other grounds raised, including alleged concealment of income, reliance on incorrect case law, distinction between revised and corrected return, and lack of notice for income enhancement, were considered irrelevant and rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309242</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>