<?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>1998 (4) TMI 122 - ANDHRA PRADESH High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16835</link>
    <description>Section 78 of the Estate Duty Act bars a civil suit that, in substance, seeks to set aside, modify, or indirectly challenge an estate duty determination or recovery action taken in good faith under the Act. Applying the same principle used for the analogous bar under section 293 of the Income-tax Act, the Court treated the refund claim as a challenge to action taken under the taxing statute and held the objection to maintainability to be a pure question of law that could be raised at the appellate stage. The suit was held not maintainable, the refund challenge failed, and liberty remained to seek remission before the Board under section 71.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Sep 2009 15:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=55835" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (4) TMI 122 - ANDHRA PRADESH High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16835</link>
      <description>Section 78 of the Estate Duty Act bars a civil suit that, in substance, seeks to set aside, modify, or indirectly challenge an estate duty determination or recovery action taken in good faith under the Act. Applying the same principle used for the analogous bar under section 293 of the Income-tax Act, the Court treated the refund claim as a challenge to action taken under the taxing statute and held the objection to maintainability to be a pure question of law that could be raised at the appellate stage. The suit was held not maintainable, the refund challenge failed, and liberty remained to seek remission before the Board under section 71.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16835</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>