<?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>1998 (8) TMI 135 - ITAT MADRAS-C</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70296</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable due to the non-payment of admitted tax on the returned undisclosed income. It was determined that Section 249(4) of the IT Act applied to appeals before the Tribunal, and the Tribunal lacked discretionary power to exempt the appellant from this requirement. As a result, the appeal was dismissed, and the interim stay previously granted was vacated.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2011 12:46:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=108649" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (8) TMI 135 - ITAT MADRAS-C</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70296</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable due to the non-payment of admitted tax on the returned undisclosed income. It was determined that Section 249(4) of the IT Act applied to appeals before the Tribunal, and the Tribunal lacked discretionary power to exempt the appellant from this requirement. As a result, the appeal was dismissed, and the interim stay previously granted was vacated.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70296</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>