<?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>2009 (3) TMI 419 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75726</link>
    <description>The petitioner was convicted and sentenced under sections 277 and 276C (i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to two years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine for each offense. The appellate court reduced the sentence to one year of rigorous imprisonment, considering the protracted trial. Despite this reduction, the petitioner sought further leniency. The court, citing mitigating circumstances and the lengthy trial period, reduced the sentence to time served and imposed a fine of Rs. 50,000 to be paid to the Income-tax Department within three months. Failure to pay the fine would negate the benefit of the reduced sentence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2013 16:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113982" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (3) TMI 419 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75726</link>
      <description>The petitioner was convicted and sentenced under sections 277 and 276C (i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to two years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine for each offense. The appellate court reduced the sentence to one year of rigorous imprisonment, considering the protracted trial. Despite this reduction, the petitioner sought further leniency. The court, citing mitigating circumstances and the lengthy trial period, reduced the sentence to time served and imposed a fine of Rs. 50,000 to be paid to the Income-tax Department within three months. Failure to pay the fine would negate the benefit of the reduced sentence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75726</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>