https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456401 The ITAT Delhi determined that the CIT (A) improperly refused to exercise appellate jurisdiction over an assessment order revised under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The ITAT concluded that CIT (A) and CIT are coequal authorities, and CIT (A) should have evaluated the appeal on its merits. Consequently, the ITAT remitted the case back to CIT (A) for proper consideration, ensuring the appeal process aligns with the statutory framework. This decision emphasized the necessity for authorities to fulfill their roles, maintaining the integrity of the assessment and appeal mechanisms under the Act. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Wed, 25 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Jul 2024 20:10:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456401 The ITAT Delhi determined that the CIT (A) improperly refused to exercise appellate jurisdiction over an assessment order revised under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The ITAT concluded that CIT (A) and CIT are coequal authorities, and CIT (A) should have evaluated the appeal on its merits. Consequently, the ITAT remitted the case back to CIT (A) for proper consideration, ensuring the appeal process aligns with the statutory framework. This decision emphasized the necessity for authorities to fulfill their roles, maintaining the integrity of the assessment and appeal mechanisms under the Act. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 25 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456401