Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

1992 (9) TMI 10

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Nagpur, the following question is referred to this court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the I. T. Act"): "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner setting aside the order of the Income-tax Officer was limited to specific ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t Commissioner challenging the fresh assessment, raising a ground that the Income-tax Officer could not have enhanced the income originally assessed. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner dismissed the appeal. The Tribunal held that the original order of the Income-tax Officer was set aside with certain directions the scope of which was very restricted and limited, beyond which the Income-tax Offic....