<?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>2025 (5) TMI 2264 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467942</link>
    <description>The dispute concerned whether the Tribunal should revisit the case because the applicability of the proviso to section 80IA(4) of the Income-tax Act had neither been advanced nor examined before it. As both sides agreed that the issue was not argued at the Tribunal stage, the Delhi HC set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration by the Tribunal. The remand was ordered so the Tribunal could determine the issue afresh on a proper hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2026 19:53:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=895995" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 2264 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467942</link>
      <description>The dispute concerned whether the Tribunal should revisit the case because the applicability of the proviso to section 80IA(4) of the Income-tax Act had neither been advanced nor examined before it. As both sides agreed that the issue was not argued at the Tribunal stage, the Delhi HC set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration by the Tribunal. The remand was ordered so the Tribunal could determine the issue afresh on a proper hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467942</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>