<?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>2006 (10) TMI 108 - ORISSA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13250</link>
    <description>In income-tax reference jurisdiction under section 256, the High Court has only incidental or ancillary powers needed to dispose of the reference, and cannot use section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code to reopen a concluded matter or seek further directions after finality has attached. Where the earlier reference decision, the Tribunal&#039;s consequential order, and the remand report have already become final, and further effective adjudication is no longer possible because the evidentiary basis has disappeared, miscellaneous applications to revive the proceedings are not maintainable. The attempted reopening was therefore rejected and the prior final orders remained undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 16:13:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=52259" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (10) TMI 108 - ORISSA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13250</link>
      <description>In income-tax reference jurisdiction under section 256, the High Court has only incidental or ancillary powers needed to dispose of the reference, and cannot use section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code to reopen a concluded matter or seek further directions after finality has attached. Where the earlier reference decision, the Tribunal&#039;s consequential order, and the remand report have already become final, and further effective adjudication is no longer possible because the evidentiary basis has disappeared, miscellaneous applications to revive the proceedings are not maintainable. The attempted reopening was therefore rejected and the prior final orders remained undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13250</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>