<?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 (11) TMI 33 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11188</link>
    <description>The High Court of Madras, in a judgment by Justice M. Chockalingam, dismissed a petition seeking a direction to compound offenses under the Income-tax Act. The court emphasized the Chief Commissioner&#039;s discretionary power to compound offenses and declined to invoke jurisdiction under the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court directed the second respondent to promptly review the representation and decide in accordance with the law, stressing adherence to legal procedures.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2015 18:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=50206" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (11) TMI 33 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11188</link>
      <description>The High Court of Madras, in a judgment by Justice M. Chockalingam, dismissed a petition seeking a direction to compound offenses under the Income-tax Act. The court emphasized the Chief Commissioner&#039;s discretionary power to compound offenses and declined to invoke jurisdiction under the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court directed the second respondent to promptly review the representation and decide in accordance with the law, stressing adherence to legal procedures.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11188</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>