<?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>1996 (1) TMI 14 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16461</link>
    <description>The High Court held that the mistake in the original assessment, where a liability was erroneously allowed as a deduction, was rectifiable under section 35 of the Wealth-tax Act. The Court emphasized that conflicting views among Tribunal Benches were settled by a High Court decision, making rectification necessary. Relying on precedents, the Court ruled in favor of the Department, answering the question referred in the negative and against the assessee, with no costs awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2009 18:34:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=55461" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (1) TMI 14 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16461</link>
      <description>The High Court held that the mistake in the original assessment, where a liability was erroneously allowed as a deduction, was rectifiable under section 35 of the Wealth-tax Act. The Court emphasized that conflicting views among Tribunal Benches were settled by a High Court decision, making rectification necessary. Relying on precedents, the Court ruled in favor of the Department, answering the question referred in the negative and against the assessee, with no costs awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16461</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>