<?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>1991 (2) TMI 32 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22110</link>
    <description>The court ruled in favor of the petitioner in a challenge against a notice issued under section 16A(2) of the Wealth-tax Act for valuation of assets for multiple assessment years. The court found the notice and reference to the Valuation Officer invalid as there were no assessment proceedings pending for the relevant years. Consequently, the court quashed both the reference and the notice, allowing the writ petition with no costs awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 11:39:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=61109" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (2) TMI 32 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22110</link>
      <description>The court ruled in favor of the petitioner in a challenge against a notice issued under section 16A(2) of the Wealth-tax Act for valuation of assets for multiple assessment years. The court found the notice and reference to the Valuation Officer invalid as there were no assessment proceedings pending for the relevant years. Consequently, the court quashed both the reference and the notice, allowing the writ petition with no costs awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22110</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>