<?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>2007 (5) TMI 202 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13418</link>
    <description>An un-stayed Special Bench order reducing the assessee&#039;s tax liability had to be given effect by subordinate authorities under judicial discipline, and the appellate authority was not justified in insisting on further deposit without considering the cumulative liability across the relevant assessment years. The text notes that the assessee had already paid amounts exceeding the tax that would remain payable if that operative order were applied, so a year-wise approach in isolation was inappropriate. Interim protection was therefore granted against the additional deposit, and the appeal was to be heard without insisting on any further pre-deposit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Jan 2024 12:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=52427" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (5) TMI 202 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13418</link>
      <description>An un-stayed Special Bench order reducing the assessee&#039;s tax liability had to be given effect by subordinate authorities under judicial discipline, and the appellate authority was not justified in insisting on further deposit without considering the cumulative liability across the relevant assessment years. The text notes that the assessee had already paid amounts exceeding the tax that would remain payable if that operative order were applied, so a year-wise approach in isolation was inappropriate. Interim protection was therefore granted against the additional deposit, and the appeal was to be heard without insisting on any further pre-deposit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13418</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>