<?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>2009 (8) TMI 1126 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170959</link>
    <description>The court upheld the Assessing Officer&#039;s decision to tax the sum of Rs. 25 lakhs under Section 28(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as it was received for refraining from business activity. The Court also found the Commissioner of Income Tax&#039;s revisional order to be legally sound and properly reasoned, dismissing the petitioner&#039;s challenge for judicial review under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 03 Sep 2023 12:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=389364" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (8) TMI 1126 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170959</link>
      <description>The court upheld the Assessing Officer&#039;s decision to tax the sum of Rs. 25 lakhs under Section 28(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as it was received for refraining from business activity. The Court also found the Commissioner of Income Tax&#039;s revisional order to be legally sound and properly reasoned, dismissing the petitioner&#039;s challenge for judicial review under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170959</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>