<?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>1969 (8) TMI 30 - ORISSA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8348</link>
    <description>A revisional order under section 33A(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, affecting an assessee&#039;s rights, required the assessee to be given a hearing before the revisional authority acted. The text relies on the Supreme Court&#039;s view that jurisdiction under that provision is judicial in nature, so natural justice applied. Orders passed without affording that opportunity could not be sustained and were liable to be set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2009 16:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=47392" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1969 (8) TMI 30 - ORISSA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8348</link>
      <description>A revisional order under section 33A(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, affecting an assessee&#039;s rights, required the assessee to be given a hearing before the revisional authority acted. The text relies on the Supreme Court&#039;s view that jurisdiction under that provision is judicial in nature, so natural justice applied. Orders passed without affording that opportunity could not be sustained and were liable to be set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8348</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>