<?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 (12) TMI 412 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371643</link>
    <description>The High Court of Bombay allowed the petitioner&#039;s applications for condonation of delay in filing a Revision Petition under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court found that the delay of 198 days was adequately explained by heavy workload, erroneous advice, and the indisposition of personnel. Emphasizing substantial justice over technicalities, the Court directed the Commissioner to decide the Revision Applications promptly to prevent further litigation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Dec 2018 06:54:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=545990" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 412 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371643</link>
      <description>The High Court of Bombay allowed the petitioner&#039;s applications for condonation of delay in filing a Revision Petition under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court found that the delay of 198 days was adequately explained by heavy workload, erroneous advice, and the indisposition of personnel. Emphasizing substantial justice over technicalities, the Court directed the Commissioner to decide the Revision Applications promptly to prevent further litigation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371643</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>