<?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>2007 (11) TMI 628 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181857</link>
    <description>Retrospective amendment to the interest provision under the Income-tax Act was held to govern delayed filing of return, so the assessee remained liable for interest despite the prior position. The operative effect of the amendment was that the levy could not be resisted once retrospectivity was accepted, and the authorities were justified in rejecting the assessee&#039;s challenge and charging interest accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2016 15:12:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=425589" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (11) TMI 628 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181857</link>
      <description>Retrospective amendment to the interest provision under the Income-tax Act was held to govern delayed filing of return, so the assessee remained liable for interest despite the prior position. The operative effect of the amendment was that the levy could not be resisted once retrospectivity was accepted, and the authorities were justified in rejecting the assessee&#039;s challenge and charging interest accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181857</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>