<?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 (12) TMI 146 - ITAT MADRAS-D</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70375</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the nationalized bank, the assessee, in the appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) for the assessment year 1980-81 regarding the levy of interest under section 139(8) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal determined that filing the return one day after the due date did not constitute a delay of a whole month, as per the interpretation of relevant provisions and legal precedents. Consequently, the interest levied under section 139(8) was canceled based on this analysis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:03:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=108720" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (12) TMI 146 - ITAT MADRAS-D</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70375</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the nationalized bank, the assessee, in the appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) for the assessment year 1980-81 regarding the levy of interest under section 139(8) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal determined that filing the return one day after the due date did not constitute a delay of a whole month, as per the interpretation of relevant provisions and legal precedents. Consequently, the interest levied under section 139(8) was canceled based on this analysis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70375</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>