<?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>1995 (7) TMI 1 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5474</link>
    <description>Section 11 of the Special Court Act confines the Special Court to directing distribution of attached property and applying the statutory order of priority for liabilities, including taxes. It may decide how much a claim can be met from available funds, but it cannot review the bona fides, reasonableness, justification, or enforceability of tax assessments made by the competent tax authority, the Tribunal, or a court under the taxing statute. The earlier liquidation decision did not expand that jurisdiction, because it only recognised the winding-up court&#039;s role in protecting competing creditors after tax had already been determined. An inquiry into the validity of the tax claim was therefore outside jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=44557" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (7) TMI 1 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5474</link>
      <description>Section 11 of the Special Court Act confines the Special Court to directing distribution of attached property and applying the statutory order of priority for liabilities, including taxes. It may decide how much a claim can be met from available funds, but it cannot review the bona fides, reasonableness, justification, or enforceability of tax assessments made by the competent tax authority, the Tribunal, or a court under the taxing statute. The earlier liquidation decision did not expand that jurisdiction, because it only recognised the winding-up court&#039;s role in protecting competing creditors after tax had already been determined. An inquiry into the validity of the tax claim was therefore outside jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5474</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>