<?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>2017 (12) TMI 412 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352143</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the notification under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, finding the transfer valid for administrative convenience and compliant with statutory requirements. The court upheld the notification, ruling that no opportunity or reasons were required for the transfer within the same city. The court concluded that the transfer was for coordinated investigation purposes and closed the connected miscellaneous petitions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=499043" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 412 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352143</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the notification under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, finding the transfer valid for administrative convenience and compliant with statutory requirements. The court upheld the notification, ruling that no opportunity or reasons were required for the transfer within the same city. The court concluded that the transfer was for coordinated investigation purposes and closed the connected miscellaneous petitions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352143</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>