<?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 (2) TMI 81 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15177</link>
    <description>A resident but not ordinarily resident assessee could not claim a concessional wealth-tax rebate reserved for a non-resident individual who is not an Indian citizen. Grant of that concession on the basis of a non-resident status was an obvious and patent error, not a debatable issue of law, and was therefore a mistake apparent from the record. The Wealth-tax Officer was entitled to invoke the rectification power under section 35 and withdraw the concession.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 15:25:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54177" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (2) TMI 81 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15177</link>
      <description>A resident but not ordinarily resident assessee could not claim a concessional wealth-tax rebate reserved for a non-resident individual who is not an Indian citizen. Grant of that concession on the basis of a non-resident status was an obvious and patent error, not a debatable issue of law, and was therefore a mistake apparent from the record. The Wealth-tax Officer was entitled to invoke the rectification power under section 35 and withdraw the concession.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15177</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>