<?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>1970 (11) TMI 14 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8140</link>
    <description>A wrong citation of the statutory source did not invalidate an assessment where the assessing authority otherwise had power to act and the relevant provisions were materially equivalent. The High Court treated section 143(3) of the 1961 Act and section 23(3) of the 1922 Act as substantially the same for transitional assessment purposes, so the assessment order was not void for want of jurisdiction. Because the assessment remained valid, penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) could not fail merely on the basis that the assessment was alleged to be void. The Tribunal&#039;s cancellation of both the assessment and penalty orders was therefore incorrect in law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2009 19:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=47186" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1970 (11) TMI 14 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8140</link>
      <description>A wrong citation of the statutory source did not invalidate an assessment where the assessing authority otherwise had power to act and the relevant provisions were materially equivalent. The High Court treated section 143(3) of the 1961 Act and section 23(3) of the 1922 Act as substantially the same for transitional assessment purposes, so the assessment order was not void for want of jurisdiction. Because the assessment remained valid, penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) could not fail merely on the basis that the assessment was alleged to be void. The Tribunal&#039;s cancellation of both the assessment and penalty orders was therefore incorrect in law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8140</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>