<?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 (2) TMI 30 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12242</link>
    <description>A finding in penalty proceedings that there was no wilful concealment does not bind the criminal court in a prosecution under section 276C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The criminal court must independently assess the prosecution evidence, and the assessee may still rebut the statutory presumption under section 278E by showing absence of mens rea. On that basis, the refusal to drop the prosecution was upheld and the petition was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 12:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=51254" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (2) TMI 30 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12242</link>
      <description>A finding in penalty proceedings that there was no wilful concealment does not bind the criminal court in a prosecution under section 276C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The criminal court must independently assess the prosecution evidence, and the assessee may still rebut the statutory presumption under section 278E by showing absence of mens rea. On that basis, the refusal to drop the prosecution was upheld and the petition was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12242</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>