<?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>2011 (2) TMI 1542 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200321</link>
    <description>The private limited company and its directors were charged under Section 276-B of the Income Tax Act for failing to deduct tax at source. The company was convicted, but one director was acquitted due to a technicality regarding notice under Section 2(35) of the Act. The court held that the company, as a legal entity, remained liable for prosecution under Section 276-B, overturning the lower court&#039;s acquittal and restoring the orders of conviction and sentence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Mar 2018 11:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=514715" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 1542 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200321</link>
      <description>The private limited company and its directors were charged under Section 276-B of the Income Tax Act for failing to deduct tax at source. The company was convicted, but one director was acquitted due to a technicality regarding notice under Section 2(35) of the Act. The court held that the company, as a legal entity, remained liable for prosecution under Section 276-B, overturning the lower court&#039;s acquittal and restoring the orders of conviction and sentence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200321</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>