<?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>2011 (3) TMI 138 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203409</link>
    <description>A recovery order was set aside and instalment-based payment was permitted pending appeal because the assessee proposed a concrete payment schedule and the revenue raised no objection. The court allowed payment in two instalments and protected the assessee from being treated as in default for the balance amount during the pendency of the appeal, subject to compliance with that schedule.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Sep 2011 16:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176969" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 138 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203409</link>
      <description>A recovery order was set aside and instalment-based payment was permitted pending appeal because the assessee proposed a concrete payment schedule and the revenue raised no objection. The court allowed payment in two instalments and protected the assessee from being treated as in default for the balance amount during the pendency of the appeal, subject to compliance with that schedule.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203409</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>