<?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 (9) TMI 884 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443262</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that the assumption of jurisdiction under section 153C was invalid as it was based solely on the Special Audit Report without incriminating material from the search. Additionally, the approval under section 153D was deemed mechanical and invalid, lacking detailed consideration. Consequently, the assessment order was quashed, and specific additions made by the Assessing Officer were not adjudicated.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Dec 2023 14:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=726590" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (9) TMI 884 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443262</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that the assumption of jurisdiction under section 153C was invalid as it was based solely on the Special Audit Report without incriminating material from the search. Additionally, the approval under section 153D was deemed mechanical and invalid, lacking detailed consideration. Consequently, the assessment order was quashed, and specific additions made by the Assessing Officer were not adjudicated.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443262</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>