<?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>1980 (4) TMI 196 - ITAT MADRAS-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69748</link>
    <description>Non-payment of the admitted tax at the time of filing did not prevent the appeals from being entertained because substantial payments had already been made, the remaining tax was paid before hearing, and the delay was attributable to financial difficulty rather than deliberate evasion. On those facts, discretion was exercised to exempt the assessee from the operation of section 249(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the appeals were required to be admitted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 18:31:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=108109" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (4) TMI 196 - ITAT MADRAS-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69748</link>
      <description>Non-payment of the admitted tax at the time of filing did not prevent the appeals from being entertained because substantial payments had already been made, the remaining tax was paid before hearing, and the delay was attributable to financial difficulty rather than deliberate evasion. On those facts, discretion was exercised to exempt the assessee from the operation of section 249(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the appeals were required to be admitted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69748</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>