<?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 (11) TMI 693 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445802</link>
    <description>ITAT Chennai dismissed assessee&#039;s appeal challenging PCIT&#039;s revision order u/s 263. The tribunal held that section 263 contains no exclusion for search assessments u/s 153A/153C, rejecting assessee&#039;s argument that revision proceedings cannot be initiated for such assessments. Regarding seized documents showing sale agreement details, ITAT found AO failed to examine evidence properly and assessee provided no counter-evidence to establish the transaction was conducted personally rather than on company&#039;s behalf. However, in another matter, ITAT allowed assessee&#039;s appeal and quashed PCIT&#039;s revision order where AO had already examined expenses and formed a possible view after raising queries, making revision impermissible under established legal principles.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Nov 2023 08:27:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=732363" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (11) TMI 693 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445802</link>
      <description>ITAT Chennai dismissed assessee&#039;s appeal challenging PCIT&#039;s revision order u/s 263. The tribunal held that section 263 contains no exclusion for search assessments u/s 153A/153C, rejecting assessee&#039;s argument that revision proceedings cannot be initiated for such assessments. Regarding seized documents showing sale agreement details, ITAT found AO failed to examine evidence properly and assessee provided no counter-evidence to establish the transaction was conducted personally rather than on company&#039;s behalf. However, in another matter, ITAT allowed assessee&#039;s appeal and quashed PCIT&#039;s revision order where AO had already examined expenses and formed a possible view after raising queries, making revision impermissible under established legal principles.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445802</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>