<?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 (6) TMI 22 - GAUHATI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17461</link>
    <description>Carry forward of business loss was treated as permissible despite the assessee not filing the return within the time prescribed under Section 139(1), because the question referred under Section 256(1) was covered by earlier binding precedent recognising that right. The Tribunal&#039;s allowance of the determined loss was said to be consistent with the settled legal position, and the issue was resolved in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:11:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=56461" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (6) TMI 22 - GAUHATI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17461</link>
      <description>Carry forward of business loss was treated as permissible despite the assessee not filing the return within the time prescribed under Section 139(1), because the question referred under Section 256(1) was covered by earlier binding precedent recognising that right. The Tribunal&#039;s allowance of the determined loss was said to be consistent with the settled legal position, and the issue was resolved in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17461</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>