<?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>1999 (4) TMI 49 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15716</link>
    <description>The High Court found that the Appellate Tribunal&#039;s order suffered from a serious infirmity due to the violation of principles of natural justice. The Tribunal&#039;s failure to provide the petitioner an opportunity to address the new ground regarding the genuineness of the transactions resulted in a miscarriage of justice. Consequently, the High Court quashed the Tribunal&#039;s order and remitted the matter back to the Appellate Tribunal for fresh consideration on the merits, ensuring the petitioner is given sufficient opportunity to present its case. The writ petition was allowed, and the rule nisi was made absolute, with no order as to costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:47:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54716" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (4) TMI 49 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15716</link>
      <description>The High Court found that the Appellate Tribunal&#039;s order suffered from a serious infirmity due to the violation of principles of natural justice. The Tribunal&#039;s failure to provide the petitioner an opportunity to address the new ground regarding the genuineness of the transactions resulted in a miscarriage of justice. Consequently, the High Court quashed the Tribunal&#039;s order and remitted the matter back to the Appellate Tribunal for fresh consideration on the merits, ensuring the petitioner is given sufficient opportunity to present its case. The writ petition was allowed, and the rule nisi was made absolute, with no order as to costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15716</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>