<?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 (3) TMI 25 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19655</link>
    <description>The case involved a challenge to an order under the Income-tax Act and a related criminal complaint. The Commissioner found the assessee guilty of tax evasion and an offense under the Act. Disputes arose over bad debts and commission payments, leading to conflicting decisions by the Commissioner and the Tribunal. The petitioner sought to rely on legal precedents to support the quashing of the prosecution, highlighting the importance of producing relevant findings from Departmental authorities. However, the court emphasized the need for complete documentation, particularly the absence of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner&#039;s order, before considering interference in extraordinary writ jurisdiction. Ultimately, the writ petition was disposed of with specific directions for the petitioner to follow in the trial court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 16:41:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=58654" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (3) TMI 25 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19655</link>
      <description>The case involved a challenge to an order under the Income-tax Act and a related criminal complaint. The Commissioner found the assessee guilty of tax evasion and an offense under the Act. Disputes arose over bad debts and commission payments, leading to conflicting decisions by the Commissioner and the Tribunal. The petitioner sought to rely on legal precedents to support the quashing of the prosecution, highlighting the importance of producing relevant findings from Departmental authorities. However, the court emphasized the need for complete documentation, particularly the absence of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner&#039;s order, before considering interference in extraordinary writ jurisdiction. Ultimately, the writ petition was disposed of with specific directions for the petitioner to follow in the trial court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19655</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>