<?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>1997 (2) TMI 70 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17320</link>
    <description>Binding jurisdictional precedent controlled the Gift-tax Act exemption question for a Hindu undivided family, because the High Court had already held that section 5(1)(viii) was unavailable to such an entity. On that footing, the Tribunal could not treat the issue as debatable merely because other High Courts had taken contrary views, since the local High Court&#039;s ruling governed within the State. The matter therefore was not one where two views were equally open, and the refusal to refer the question on the ground of no apparent mistake from the record was incorrect; the reference ought to have been made.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2009 15:47:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=56320" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (2) TMI 70 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17320</link>
      <description>Binding jurisdictional precedent controlled the Gift-tax Act exemption question for a Hindu undivided family, because the High Court had already held that section 5(1)(viii) was unavailable to such an entity. On that footing, the Tribunal could not treat the issue as debatable merely because other High Courts had taken contrary views, since the local High Court&#039;s ruling governed within the State. The matter therefore was not one where two views were equally open, and the refusal to refer the question on the ground of no apparent mistake from the record was incorrect; the reference ought to have been made.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17320</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>