<?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 (8) TMI 721 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365249</link>
    <description>Delay Condonation application was allowed as the court found the grounds sufficient. The petitioner&#039;s claim for benefit under the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 was denied due to facing prosecution under Chapter XVII of IPC. Despite exclusion, the petitioner&#039;s claim was rejected, leading to dismissal of the writ petition. The review application was dismissed as the new facts presented did not meet the limited grounds for review under the Civil Procedure Code.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2018 06:12:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=530612" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 721 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365249</link>
      <description>Delay Condonation application was allowed as the court found the grounds sufficient. The petitioner&#039;s claim for benefit under the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 was denied due to facing prosecution under Chapter XVII of IPC. Despite exclusion, the petitioner&#039;s claim was rejected, leading to dismissal of the writ petition. The review application was dismissed as the new facts presented did not meet the limited grounds for review under the Civil Procedure Code.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365249</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>