<?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>2009 (4) TMI 989 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191586</link>
    <description>The High Court admitted two substantial questions of law arising from the Tribunal&#039;s order. First, it will examine whether gutka falls within item 2 of the Eleventh Schedule as a tobacco preparation or chewing tobacco, and whether that classification affects the claim for deduction under the cited income-tax provisions. Second, it will consider whether the Tribunal relied on arguments not taken in the assessment order or during hearing, thereby violating principles of natural justice. The order is confined to admission of these legal questions and does not decide the merits of classification, deduction entitlement, or alleged procedural unfairness.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Apr 2017 18:26:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=465212" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 989 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191586</link>
      <description>The High Court admitted two substantial questions of law arising from the Tribunal&#039;s order. First, it will examine whether gutka falls within item 2 of the Eleventh Schedule as a tobacco preparation or chewing tobacco, and whether that classification affects the claim for deduction under the cited income-tax provisions. Second, it will consider whether the Tribunal relied on arguments not taken in the assessment order or during hearing, thereby violating principles of natural justice. The order is confined to admission of these legal questions and does not decide the merits of classification, deduction entitlement, or alleged procedural unfairness.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191586</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>