<?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>2018 (3) TMI 149 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356446</link>
    <description>The Court held that the impugned penalty notices were time-barred under Section 275(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act. The judgment allowed the writ petitions, keeping the notices in abeyance until the CIT (A) disposes of the pending appeals, without imposing any costs on the petitioners.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 May 2018 16:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=511311" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (3) TMI 149 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356446</link>
      <description>The Court held that the impugned penalty notices were time-barred under Section 275(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act. The judgment allowed the writ petitions, keeping the notices in abeyance until the CIT (A) disposes of the pending appeals, without imposing any costs on the petitioners.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356446</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>