<?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>2017 (8) TMI 1489 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276693</link>
    <description>Exemption from court fees was granted subject to all just exceptions, and the delays in filing and re-filing the appeal were condoned on the reasons stated in the applications. On the merits, the Revenue&#039;s challenge to the ITAT order for AY 2004-05 was not entertained because the questions raised had already been answered against the Revenue by an earlier High Court decision in the same line of dispute. The appeal was therefore disposed of against the Revenue on precedent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2018 06:51:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=542053" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 1489 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276693</link>
      <description>Exemption from court fees was granted subject to all just exceptions, and the delays in filing and re-filing the appeal were condoned on the reasons stated in the applications. On the merits, the Revenue&#039;s challenge to the ITAT order for AY 2004-05 was not entertained because the questions raised had already been answered against the Revenue by an earlier High Court decision in the same line of dispute. The appeal was therefore disposed of against the Revenue on precedent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276693</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>