<?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>1995 (3) TMI 17 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18489</link>
    <description>Prosecution sanction under the Income-tax Act need not be preceded by a proposal from the assessing authority. Challenges alleging invalid sanction or lack of application of mind may be tested during trial, where the sanction can be proved as evidence and the accused may raise objections at the appropriate stage. These objections did not justify quashing criminal proceedings for alleged tax evasion and false verification, and the petitions seeking quashing were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 12:45:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=57489" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (3) TMI 17 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18489</link>
      <description>Prosecution sanction under the Income-tax Act need not be preceded by a proposal from the assessing authority. Challenges alleging invalid sanction or lack of application of mind may be tested during trial, where the sanction can be proved as evidence and the accused may raise objections at the appropriate stage. These objections did not justify quashing criminal proceedings for alleged tax evasion and false verification, and the petitions seeking quashing were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18489</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>