<?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 (9) TMI 1166 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272772</link>
    <description>For rehabilitation schemes seeking tax concessions under SICA, deemed consent under section 19(2) depends on valid service of the Draft Rehabilitation Scheme on the authority designated by the applicable CBDT circular to represent the Central Government. Service only on an Assessing Officer, without proof that the designated nodal authority received the scheme or was duly authorised to act, is insufficient for deemed consent. The text also notes that the separate issue concerning section 115JB of the Income-tax Act was not finally determined and required reconsideration by the BIFR. The practical effect is that compliance with the prescribed service route is essential before a sanctioned scheme can bind the Income Tax Department.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 May 2018 11:58:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=520664" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (9) TMI 1166 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272772</link>
      <description>For rehabilitation schemes seeking tax concessions under SICA, deemed consent under section 19(2) depends on valid service of the Draft Rehabilitation Scheme on the authority designated by the applicable CBDT circular to represent the Central Government. Service only on an Assessing Officer, without proof that the designated nodal authority received the scheme or was duly authorised to act, is insufficient for deemed consent. The text also notes that the separate issue concerning section 115JB of the Income-tax Act was not finally determined and required reconsideration by the BIFR. The practical effect is that compliance with the prescribed service route is essential before a sanctioned scheme can bind the Income Tax Department.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272772</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>