<?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 (9) TMI 1556 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312411</link>
    <description>The HC upheld the ITAT&#039;s decision, dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeal concerning the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15. The court agreed with the Tribunal&#039;s finding that the Assessing Officer had conducted a proper enquiry under Section 143(3) and that the assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the revenue. The Tribunal&#039;s interpretation of the legal distinction between &quot;lack of enquiry&quot; and &quot;inadequate enquiry&quot; was deemed correct, and thus, the invocation of Section 263 by the Principal Commissioner was unjustified. The appeal was dismissed, and the related application for stay was closed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2024 19:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=743797" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 1556 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312411</link>
      <description>The HC upheld the ITAT&#039;s decision, dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeal concerning the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15. The court agreed with the Tribunal&#039;s finding that the Assessing Officer had conducted a proper enquiry under Section 143(3) and that the assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the revenue. The Tribunal&#039;s interpretation of the legal distinction between &quot;lack of enquiry&quot; and &quot;inadequate enquiry&quot; was deemed correct, and thus, the invocation of Section 263 by the Principal Commissioner was unjustified. The appeal was dismissed, and the related application for stay was closed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312411</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>