<?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 (10) TMI 279 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208815</link>
    <description>P&amp;H HC held that Sub-s. (4) of s.139 is an exception extending the time prescribed by s.139(1), so a sale on 13.1.2006 (PY 2006-07) could be reported by 31.3.2007. The assessee&#039;s return filed on 31.3.2007 was within the extended period; the failure to deposit in CGAS or purchase before the original due date did not defeat the extended filing entitlement. The appeal by revenue was dismissed and the question resolved against revenue and for the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2025 14:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=182273" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (10) TMI 279 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208815</link>
      <description>P&amp;H HC held that Sub-s. (4) of s.139 is an exception extending the time prescribed by s.139(1), so a sale on 13.1.2006 (PY 2006-07) could be reported by 31.3.2007. The assessee&#039;s return filed on 31.3.2007 was within the extended period; the failure to deposit in CGAS or purchase before the original due date did not defeat the extended filing entitlement. The appeal by revenue was dismissed and the question resolved against revenue and for the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208815</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>