<?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>2024 (2) TMI 1603 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464432</link>
    <description>ITAT held that the assessment was vitiated by complete absence of inquiry and non-application of mind by the AO; directions by the Pr. CIT under s.263 were clear and warranted revision. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the impugned revision order, rejected the contention that subsequent adoption of the Pr. CIT&#039;s observations could cure the defect, and dismissed the assessee&#039;s appeal, noting its decision does not express any view on the merits but rests solely on procedural failure by the assessing authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2025 19:07:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=860946" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 1603 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464432</link>
      <description>ITAT held that the assessment was vitiated by complete absence of inquiry and non-application of mind by the AO; directions by the Pr. CIT under s.263 were clear and warranted revision. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the impugned revision order, rejected the contention that subsequent adoption of the Pr. CIT&#039;s observations could cure the defect, and dismissed the assessee&#039;s appeal, noting its decision does not express any view on the merits but rests solely on procedural failure by the assessing authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464432</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>