<?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 1334 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209616</link>
    <description>Penalty proceedings under Section 221(1) of the Income-tax Act were treated as premature where the assessment orders were already under challenge in pending appeals and connected stay petitions remained undecided. The proper course was to consider the stay petitions expeditiously after notice to the petitioner and to avoid coercive recovery in the interim. Recovery pursuant to the penalty notice was stayed until the stay petitions were decided.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Jul 2013 17:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=183062" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 1334 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209616</link>
      <description>Penalty proceedings under Section 221(1) of the Income-tax Act were treated as premature where the assessment orders were already under challenge in pending appeals and connected stay petitions remained undecided. The proper course was to consider the stay petitions expeditiously after notice to the petitioner and to avoid coercive recovery in the interim. Recovery pursuant to the penalty notice was stayed until the stay petitions were decided.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209616</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>