<?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>1995 (3) TMI 123 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57495</link>
    <description>The tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)&#039;s order and directing the CIT(A) to entertain and decide the appeal on its merits. The tribunal held that the provisions of sec. 249(4) do not apply to penalties like the one imposed under sec. 271D, emphasizing the inherent right of appeal for an assessee against penalty orders.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:56:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=95954" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (3) TMI 123 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57495</link>
      <description>The tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)&#039;s order and directing the CIT(A) to entertain and decide the appeal on its merits. The tribunal held that the provisions of sec. 249(4) do not apply to penalties like the one imposed under sec. 271D, emphasizing the inherent right of appeal for an assessee against penalty orders.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57495</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>