<?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>1999 (4) TMI 108 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60956</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the actions of the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of compliance with legal provisions, justifying the adjustment made under section 143(1)(a) based on the information in the return. The plea of ignorance of the law was rejected, and the failure to deposit the unutilized amount in the specified scheme was deemed a substantive non-compliance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:28:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=99403" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (4) TMI 108 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60956</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the actions of the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of compliance with legal provisions, justifying the adjustment made under section 143(1)(a) based on the information in the return. The plea of ignorance of the law was rejected, and the failure to deposit the unutilized amount in the specified scheme was deemed a substantive non-compliance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60956</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>