<?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>1984 (2) TMI 153 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62698</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the notice under Section 210 of the IT Act was invalid due to an order by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, leading to the assessee not being obligated to file an estimate of advance tax. The penalty under Section 273(c) was deemed unjustified and canceled. A dissenting opinion upheld the penalty, but the majority view allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:56:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=101144" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (2) TMI 153 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62698</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the notice under Section 210 of the IT Act was invalid due to an order by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, leading to the assessee not being obligated to file an estimate of advance tax. The penalty under Section 273(c) was deemed unjustified and canceled. A dissenting opinion upheld the penalty, but the majority view allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62698</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>