<?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>2000 (12) TMI 65 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14249</link>
    <description>An unsigned and unverified return of income did not satisfy the basic statutory requirements for a valid return under section 140 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Issuance of notice under section 143(2) did not cure that defect or confer validity on a return that was invalid from the outset. The question was answered in the negative, and the issue was decided in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 16:44:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=53249" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (12) TMI 65 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14249</link>
      <description>An unsigned and unverified return of income did not satisfy the basic statutory requirements for a valid return under section 140 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Issuance of notice under section 143(2) did not cure that defect or confer validity on a return that was invalid from the outset. The question was answered in the negative, and the issue was decided in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14249</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>