<?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>2001 (1) TMI 71 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14504</link>
    <description>The court set aside the impugned orders and exhibits P-7, P-9, P-9(a), and P-11, finding that the appropriate authority failed to consider the unique circumstances of the transfer and did not apply its mind properly. The petitioners&#039; application (exhibit P-6) was to be reconsidered, and new orders were to be issued in accordance with the law. The original petition was allowed without any cost implications.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 12:44:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=53504" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (1) TMI 71 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14504</link>
      <description>The court set aside the impugned orders and exhibits P-7, P-9, P-9(a), and P-11, finding that the appropriate authority failed to consider the unique circumstances of the transfer and did not apply its mind properly. The petitioners&#039; application (exhibit P-6) was to be reconsidered, and new orders were to be issued in accordance with the law. The original petition was allowed without any cost implications.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14504</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>