<?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>2005 (1) TMI 100 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13712</link>
    <description>Penalties for delayed filing of wealth-tax returns cannot survive where the underlying assessments are time-barred and therefore invalid under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The Tribunal treated the relevant assessments as barred by limitation and held that returns filed after the assessment period could not validate assessments made thereafter. On that basis, the penalty levies imposed with reference to those assessments were not sustainable. The separate question on the rate of penalty was left unanswered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 May 2010 01:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=52720" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (1) TMI 100 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13712</link>
      <description>Penalties for delayed filing of wealth-tax returns cannot survive where the underlying assessments are time-barred and therefore invalid under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The Tribunal treated the relevant assessments as barred by limitation and held that returns filed after the assessment period could not validate assessments made thereafter. On that basis, the penalty levies imposed with reference to those assessments were not sustainable. The separate question on the rate of penalty was left unanswered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13712</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>