<?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>1998 (11) TMI 26 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14783</link>
    <description>The court held that it had territorial jurisdiction as the cause of action arose where the impugned notices were issued. It found the notices under the Income-tax and Wealth-tax Acts invalid, lacking tangible material to suspect concealed income. The court concluded that the actions were mala fide, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction, quashing the notices and restraining further proceedings against the petitioners. Costs were awarded to the petitioners.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 15:55:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=53783" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (11) TMI 26 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14783</link>
      <description>The court held that it had territorial jurisdiction as the cause of action arose where the impugned notices were issued. It found the notices under the Income-tax and Wealth-tax Acts invalid, lacking tangible material to suspect concealed income. The court concluded that the actions were mala fide, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction, quashing the notices and restraining further proceedings against the petitioners. Costs were awarded to the petitioners.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14783</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>