<?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 (4) TMI 47 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11581</link>
    <description>A discharge order will stand where the materials do not establish the essential ingredients of forgery or the other alleged offences. The complaint alleged that a declaration for continuation of registration bore a forged signature and therefore constituted a false document, but the record showed that the firm&#039;s constitution had been recognised by the income-tax authorities, the assessment concerned an earlier year, and there was no material showing that the disputed signatory denied authorising affixture of the signature. On that footing, the High Court found no illegality in the Magistrate&#039;s order and declined interference with the discharge.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 17:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=50595" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (4) TMI 47 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11581</link>
      <description>A discharge order will stand where the materials do not establish the essential ingredients of forgery or the other alleged offences. The complaint alleged that a declaration for continuation of registration bore a forged signature and therefore constituted a false document, but the record showed that the firm&#039;s constitution had been recognised by the income-tax authorities, the assessment concerned an earlier year, and there was no material showing that the disputed signatory denied authorising affixture of the signature. On that footing, the High Court found no illegality in the Magistrate&#039;s order and declined interference with the discharge.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11581</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>