<?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 (5) TMI 20 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19881</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the restraint order under section 132(3) of the Income-tax Act as infructuous due to a subsequent provisional attachment order. However, the court awarded costs of Rs. 3,500 to the petitioners, emphasizing the need for Revenue authorities to act promptly and fairly in exercising their powers under the Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:26:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=58880" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (5) TMI 20 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19881</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the restraint order under section 132(3) of the Income-tax Act as infructuous due to a subsequent provisional attachment order. However, the court awarded costs of Rs. 3,500 to the petitioners, emphasizing the need for Revenue authorities to act promptly and fairly in exercising their powers under the Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19881</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>