<?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>2002 (10) TMI 83 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12237</link>
    <description>The High Court of Rajasthan allowed the appeal by the State of Rajasthan against the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s order for the assessment year 1990-91 regarding a penalty for non-filing of TDS returns. The court condoned a ten-day delay in filing the appeal, directed separate appeals for each challenged order, and emphasized the need for considering reasonable causes for failures and provisions for penalty reduction or waiver. It stayed the penalty recovery for six months pending a decision on waiver application and held State Government officers personally liable for penalties, not the State Government itself. No costs were awarded, promoting adherence to statutory provisions and dispute resolution mechanisms.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=51249" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (10) TMI 83 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12237</link>
      <description>The High Court of Rajasthan allowed the appeal by the State of Rajasthan against the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s order for the assessment year 1990-91 regarding a penalty for non-filing of TDS returns. The court condoned a ten-day delay in filing the appeal, directed separate appeals for each challenged order, and emphasized the need for considering reasonable causes for failures and provisions for penalty reduction or waiver. It stayed the penalty recovery for six months pending a decision on waiver application and held State Government officers personally liable for penalties, not the State Government itself. No costs were awarded, promoting adherence to statutory provisions and dispute resolution mechanisms.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12237</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>