<?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>2022 (5) TMI 1573 - ITAT JABALPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309328</link>
    <description>Under the income-tax appeal instructions, a low tax effect dismissal was held unsustainable where the appellate record already contained the authorization memo and departmental material showing that the Revenue had invoked the exception for cases involving acceptance of a Revenue Audit objection. The Tribunal found that its earlier non-maintainability order had overlooked material on record, and that such omission constituted a mistake apparent from the record. A recall under section 254(2) was therefore permitted to restore the appeals for fresh hearing under section 254(1), because the rectification did not amount to a review of a merits decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Aug 2023 22:23:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=723617" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (5) TMI 1573 - ITAT JABALPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309328</link>
      <description>Under the income-tax appeal instructions, a low tax effect dismissal was held unsustainable where the appellate record already contained the authorization memo and departmental material showing that the Revenue had invoked the exception for cases involving acceptance of a Revenue Audit objection. The Tribunal found that its earlier non-maintainability order had overlooked material on record, and that such omission constituted a mistake apparent from the record. A recall under section 254(2) was therefore permitted to restore the appeals for fresh hearing under section 254(1), because the rectification did not amount to a review of a merits decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309328</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>