<?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>2017 (9) TMI 1698 - Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274024</link>
    <description>The Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi, addressed the challenge by an Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) against a Charge Memorandum and consequential letter, focusing on the validity of the Charge Memorandum and the jurisdiction of the competent authority. The applicant argued that the Charge Memorandum, not approved by the President or Finance Minister, was invalid, citing precedent. The respondents contended that the Charge Memorandum, issued in the name of the President through the Finance Ministry, was valid. The Tribunal decided to issue notice to the respondents for a reply, emphasizing the need for a detailed examination before considering interim relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2018 13:25:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=528210" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 1698 - Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274024</link>
      <description>The Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi, addressed the challenge by an Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) against a Charge Memorandum and consequential letter, focusing on the validity of the Charge Memorandum and the jurisdiction of the competent authority. The applicant argued that the Charge Memorandum, not approved by the President or Finance Minister, was invalid, citing precedent. The respondents contended that the Charge Memorandum, issued in the name of the President through the Finance Ministry, was valid. The Tribunal decided to issue notice to the respondents for a reply, emphasizing the need for a detailed examination before considering interim relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274024</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>