<?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>1994 (10) TMI 26 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19412</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal seeking to reverse the Sessions Court&#039;s decision and reinstate the Magistrate&#039;s order in a case involving offenses under sections 276C(1)(c), (ii), and 277(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appeal was time-barred due to a delay of 188 days, with the petitioner failing to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing. Despite producing an affidavit from the Assistant Director of Income-tax to support the petition for condonation of delay, the court held that the grounds presented were insufficient. The court deemed the Assistant Director of Income-tax competent to file the affidavit, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the petition for condonation of delay.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 10:43:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=58411" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (10) TMI 26 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19412</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal seeking to reverse the Sessions Court&#039;s decision and reinstate the Magistrate&#039;s order in a case involving offenses under sections 276C(1)(c), (ii), and 277(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appeal was time-barred due to a delay of 188 days, with the petitioner failing to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing. Despite producing an affidavit from the Assistant Director of Income-tax to support the petition for condonation of delay, the court held that the grounds presented were insufficient. The court deemed the Assistant Director of Income-tax competent to file the affidavit, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the petition for condonation of delay.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19412</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>