<?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>1992 (7) TMI 97 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55667</link>
    <description>Once an assessee&#039;s settlement application is admitted under section 245C and permitted to proceed under section 245D, section 245F(2) gives the Settlement Commission exclusive jurisdiction over the case until an order under section 245D(4) is passed. During that period, appellate authorities cannot exercise parallel jurisdiction over the same matters. Because the case may also return under section 245HA(1), the proper course is to keep the appeals in abeyance rather than dismiss them finally on the basis of settlement admission alone. The Commissioner (Appeals) therefore lacked jurisdiction to dismiss the appeals and was required to keep them pending until the settlement proceedings concluded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Nov 2010 13:09:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=94129" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (7) TMI 97 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55667</link>
      <description>Once an assessee&#039;s settlement application is admitted under section 245C and permitted to proceed under section 245D, section 245F(2) gives the Settlement Commission exclusive jurisdiction over the case until an order under section 245D(4) is passed. During that period, appellate authorities cannot exercise parallel jurisdiction over the same matters. Because the case may also return under section 245HA(1), the proper course is to keep the appeals in abeyance rather than dismiss them finally on the basis of settlement admission alone. The Commissioner (Appeals) therefore lacked jurisdiction to dismiss the appeals and was required to keep them pending until the settlement proceedings concluded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55667</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>