<?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>1934 (6) TMI 29 - LAHORE HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178262</link>
    <description>A return furnished under the Income-tax Act, 1922 must comply substantially with the prescribed form, verification requirements and disclosure of total income for the relevant previous year. A return containing vague income figures, omitting the accounting period in the verification, and failing to give the particulars required for mercantile-system accounts was treated as materially defective rather than merely irregular. Such defects meant the document could not be regarded as a proper statutory return and would not satisfy the notice issued under the Act. The reasoning also supported the view that the assessee could not rely on the document as a valid return in defence of prosecution for non-filing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 1934 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2016 12:22:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=414945" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1934 (6) TMI 29 - LAHORE HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178262</link>
      <description>A return furnished under the Income-tax Act, 1922 must comply substantially with the prescribed form, verification requirements and disclosure of total income for the relevant previous year. A return containing vague income figures, omitting the accounting period in the verification, and failing to give the particulars required for mercantile-system accounts was treated as materially defective rather than merely irregular. Such defects meant the document could not be regarded as a proper statutory return and would not satisfy the notice issued under the Act. The reasoning also supported the view that the assessee could not rely on the document as a valid return in defence of prosecution for non-filing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 1934 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178262</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>