<?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>2018 (7) TMI 1625 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364317</link>
    <description>The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order directing the Assessee to pay 20% of the disputed tax demand, and instructed the petitioner to file a stay petition before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The CIT (Appeals) is to consider all aspects during the hearing and decide on the stay petition&#039;s merits, leaving the assessment issues for the CIT (Appeals) to address comprehensively.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2018 08:54:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=528306" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 1625 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364317</link>
      <description>The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order directing the Assessee to pay 20% of the disputed tax demand, and instructed the petitioner to file a stay petition before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The CIT (Appeals) is to consider all aspects during the hearing and decide on the stay petition&#039;s merits, leaving the assessment issues for the CIT (Appeals) to address comprehensively.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364317</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>