<?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 (3) TMI 75 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11807</link>
    <description>The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned order, and directed the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to dispose of the appeals afresh after providing an opportunity of hearing to the concerned parties. The court emphasized the importance of affording parties a chance to be heard, especially when the judgment of the higher court differs from that of the Tribunal. The appeals were instructed to be resolved promptly, preferably within eight weeks, without imposing any costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 12:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=50820" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (3) TMI 75 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11807</link>
      <description>The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned order, and directed the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to dispose of the appeals afresh after providing an opportunity of hearing to the concerned parties. The court emphasized the importance of affording parties a chance to be heard, especially when the judgment of the higher court differs from that of the Tribunal. The appeals were instructed to be resolved promptly, preferably within eight weeks, without imposing any costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11807</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>