<?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 (5) TMI 582 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205053</link>
    <description>Writ review of Settlement Commission orders is confined to grave procedural defects, breach of natural justice, lack of nexus between reasons and decision, or action contrary to the Act. Where the Commission records retraction of an earlier admission, considers search material, and adopts an income-estimation method used in a comparable matter, its factual findings cannot be reappreciated unless shown to be perverse, arbitrary, or unsupported by the record. A different assessment of voluntary statements or the estimation method does not justify substituting the writ court&#039;s view. The writ petition was therefore liable to be dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=178578" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (5) TMI 582 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205053</link>
      <description>Writ review of Settlement Commission orders is confined to grave procedural defects, breach of natural justice, lack of nexus between reasons and decision, or action contrary to the Act. Where the Commission records retraction of an earlier admission, considers search material, and adopts an income-estimation method used in a comparable matter, its factual findings cannot be reappreciated unless shown to be perverse, arbitrary, or unsupported by the record. A different assessment of voluntary statements or the estimation method does not justify substituting the writ court&#039;s view. The writ petition was therefore liable to be dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205053</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>