<?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>2003 (1) TMI 17 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11149</link>
    <description>Section 95(i)(c) of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 was construed to require that an appeal or reference be both admitted and pending on the relevant date; the mere existence of an appeal was insufficient. Because the assessee failed to show that its appeal had ever been admitted, the statutory exclusion applied and the declaration was not maintainable. The interpretation was upheld and the intra-court appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 19:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=50167" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (1) TMI 17 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11149</link>
      <description>Section 95(i)(c) of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 was construed to require that an appeal or reference be both admitted and pending on the relevant date; the mere existence of an appeal was insufficient. Because the assessee failed to show that its appeal had ever been admitted, the statutory exclusion applied and the declaration was not maintainable. The interpretation was upheld and the intra-court appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11149</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>