<?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 (10) TMI 247 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368281</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order, and remitted the matter back to the first respondent for fresh consideration. The first respondent was directed to reconsider the entire matter, taking into account the findings and observations made by the court, and pass a fresh order within four weeks. The petitioner was allowed to submit further substantial materials, including identity proof and addresses of the lessees.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2018 15:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=537114" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 247 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368281</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order, and remitted the matter back to the first respondent for fresh consideration. The first respondent was directed to reconsider the entire matter, taking into account the findings and observations made by the court, and pass a fresh order within four weeks. The petitioner was allowed to submit further substantial materials, including identity proof and addresses of the lessees.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368281</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>