<?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>1999 (7) TMI 11 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14383</link>
    <description>The court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the Commissioner of Income-tax&#039;s order and directing the renewal of the firm&#039;s registration. The court emphasized the binding nature of the CBDT circular and the validity of the belated return once regularized under section 148. The writ petition was allowed with no costs, and the rule nisi was made absolute.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 14:32:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=53383" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (7) TMI 11 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14383</link>
      <description>The court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the Commissioner of Income-tax&#039;s order and directing the renewal of the firm&#039;s registration. The court emphasized the binding nature of the CBDT circular and the validity of the belated return once regularized under section 148. The writ petition was allowed with no costs, and the rule nisi was made absolute.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14383</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>