<?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>2019 (9) TMI 203 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385435</link>
    <description>The SC applied the CBDT&#039;s administrative tax effect threshold and held that where the tax effect was below the specified monetary limit, no interference was warranted with the decision below. The Court recorded condonation of delay, but that did not affect the result because the appeal was governed by the circular dated 8.8.2019. The special leave petition was therefore dismissed, and the matter was disposed of in line with the policy against pursuing low-tax-effect cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Sep 2019 07:33:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=586104" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 203 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385435</link>
      <description>The SC applied the CBDT&#039;s administrative tax effect threshold and held that where the tax effect was below the specified monetary limit, no interference was warranted with the decision below. The Court recorded condonation of delay, but that did not affect the result because the appeal was governed by the circular dated 8.8.2019. The special leave petition was therefore dismissed, and the matter was disposed of in line with the policy against pursuing low-tax-effect cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385435</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>