<?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>1993 (9) TMI 146 - ITAT BOMBAY-E</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59173</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the Commissioner&#039;s jurisdiction under section 263 was unwarranted as no errors were identified in the assessment process. The Assessing Officer lacked a basis for further investigation, and the Tribunal emphasized the importance of clear material for income additions. Consequently, the revisional order was set aside, and the original assessment was reinstated, resulting in the appeal being allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Sep 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 Feb 2011 03:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=97626" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (9) TMI 146 - ITAT BOMBAY-E</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59173</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the Commissioner&#039;s jurisdiction under section 263 was unwarranted as no errors were identified in the assessment process. The Assessing Officer lacked a basis for further investigation, and the Tribunal emphasized the importance of clear material for income additions. Consequently, the revisional order was set aside, and the original assessment was reinstated, resulting in the appeal being allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Sep 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59173</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>