<?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>2016 (7) TMI 209 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329611</link>
    <description>The court upheld the constitutional validity of the amendment to Section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, emphasizing the government&#039;s need for financial information to combat black money over individual privacy concerns. The court balanced the right to privacy with the nation&#039;s economic interests, ruling that the provision did not infringe on fundamental rights and dismissing the writ appeals challenging the widened scope of Section 133(6).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Dec 2016 18:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=433962" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 209 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329611</link>
      <description>The court upheld the constitutional validity of the amendment to Section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, emphasizing the government&#039;s need for financial information to combat black money over individual privacy concerns. The court balanced the right to privacy with the nation&#039;s economic interests, ruling that the provision did not infringe on fundamental rights and dismissing the writ appeals challenging the widened scope of Section 133(6).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329611</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>