<?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>2013 (10) TMI 1236 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238781</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the decisions of the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) that the transactions involving the transfer of shares at different prices were genuine and not colorable devices to evade tax. The Court found that the transactions were legitimate within the legal framework and not aimed at tax evasion, ultimately ruling against the Appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 May 2026 12:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=333938" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (10) TMI 1236 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238781</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the decisions of the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) that the transactions involving the transfer of shares at different prices were genuine and not colorable devices to evade tax. The Court found that the transactions were legitimate within the legal framework and not aimed at tax evasion, ultimately ruling against the Appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238781</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>