<?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>1971 (1) TMI 18 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6248</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act was held to be applicable on the first question raised, because the issue had already been settled by an earlier Supreme Court decision and counsel accepted that position. The Court therefore answered the question in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue, against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=45331" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1971 (1) TMI 18 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6248</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act was held to be applicable on the first question raised, because the issue had already been settled by an earlier Supreme Court decision and counsel accepted that position. The Court therefore answered the question in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue, against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6248</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>