<?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 (8) TMI 48 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17601</link>
    <description>The High Court found that the Tribunal erred in requiring positive evidence of benami transactions and failed to consider primary facts indicating the contracts were not genuine. The Court directed the Tribunal to re-examine the case, considering the observations and facts provided by the ITO. The High Court quashed the Tribunal&#039;s order and returned the reference unanswered, without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:38:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=56601" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (8) TMI 48 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17601</link>
      <description>The High Court found that the Tribunal erred in requiring positive evidence of benami transactions and failed to consider primary facts indicating the contracts were not genuine. The Court directed the Tribunal to re-examine the case, considering the observations and facts provided by the ITO. The High Court quashed the Tribunal&#039;s order and returned the reference unanswered, without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17601</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>