<?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>2000 (9) TMI 14 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12938</link>
    <description>The High Court quashed the criminal complaint against the petitioner for violating section 269SS of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Relying on legal precedents, the court held that the complaint was not maintainable due to legislative changes and retrospective effect of statutory provisions. Consequently, all proceedings, including the order by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, were set aside, and the petition was allowed in favor of the petitioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 May 2009 13:50:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=51948" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (9) TMI 14 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12938</link>
      <description>The High Court quashed the criminal complaint against the petitioner for violating section 269SS of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Relying on legal precedents, the court held that the complaint was not maintainable due to legislative changes and retrospective effect of statutory provisions. Consequently, all proceedings, including the order by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, were set aside, and the petition was allowed in favor of the petitioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12938</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>