<?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>1958 (9) TMI 96 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276800</link>
    <description>A company was entitled to rebate under the Finance Act, 1955 where section 23A of the Income-tax Act, 1922 could not lawfully be applied because the statutory conditions for making an order under it were absent. The phrase &quot;cannot be made applicable&quot; was construed to mean denial of rebate only when the requirements for exercising section 23A power exist. As statutory dividends had been paid and no valid order under section 23A could be made, the rebate remained available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2018 15:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=542447" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1958 (9) TMI 96 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276800</link>
      <description>A company was entitled to rebate under the Finance Act, 1955 where section 23A of the Income-tax Act, 1922 could not lawfully be applied because the statutory conditions for making an order under it were absent. The phrase &quot;cannot be made applicable&quot; was construed to mean denial of rebate only when the requirements for exercising section 23A power exist. As statutory dividends had been paid and no valid order under section 23A could be made, the rebate remained available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276800</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>