<?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>1961 (12) TMI 95 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191751</link>
    <description>Where penal interest under section 18A(6) was mandatory, no separate formal order was required: computation and entry of the interest in the assessment record was sufficient to constitute the levy. The court also held that omission to impose such mandatory interest in the original assessment was a rectifiable error, so correction through section 35 was valid and the revised demand stood. The writ challenge to recovery of the penal interest therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Dec 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Apr 2017 18:05:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=466126" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1961 (12) TMI 95 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191751</link>
      <description>Where penal interest under section 18A(6) was mandatory, no separate formal order was required: computation and entry of the interest in the assessment record was sufficient to constitute the levy. The court also held that omission to impose such mandatory interest in the original assessment was a rectifiable error, so correction through section 35 was valid and the revised demand stood. The writ challenge to recovery of the penal interest therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Dec 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191751</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>