<?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>2010 (8) TMI 161 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=79023</link>
    <description>The High Court rejected the application for condonation of delay in filing a review petition by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Muzaffar Nagar. The Court found the reasons provided, relating to internal Departmental decision-making processes, insufficient to justify the significant delay of two years and 65 days. It was deemed unlikely that obtaining permission from higher authorities took that long. Consequently, the Court rejected the condonation application, leading to the dismissal of the review petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2011 16:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117117" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (8) TMI 161 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=79023</link>
      <description>The High Court rejected the application for condonation of delay in filing a review petition by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Muzaffar Nagar. The Court found the reasons provided, relating to internal Departmental decision-making processes, insufficient to justify the significant delay of two years and 65 days. It was deemed unlikely that obtaining permission from higher authorities took that long. Consequently, the Court rejected the condonation application, leading to the dismissal of the review petition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=79023</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>