<?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>1990 (9) TMI 27 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22550</link>
    <description>The High Court of BOMBAY ruled that a rectification order made by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) under section 154 was time-barred under section 154(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court emphasized that the Department cannot benefit from its delay in passing rectification orders and clarified that this principle does not apply when one departmental officer rectifies another&#039;s order. The court dismissed the reference sought by the Department, as the first question was answered by the limitation issue, making the second question irrelevant. Consequently, the rectification order was deemed invalid due to exceeding the statutory limitation period, and the rule was discharged without costs awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 11:23:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=61549" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (9) TMI 27 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22550</link>
      <description>The High Court of BOMBAY ruled that a rectification order made by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) under section 154 was time-barred under section 154(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court emphasized that the Department cannot benefit from its delay in passing rectification orders and clarified that this principle does not apply when one departmental officer rectifies another&#039;s order. The court dismissed the reference sought by the Department, as the first question was answered by the limitation issue, making the second question irrelevant. Consequently, the rectification order was deemed invalid due to exceeding the statutory limitation period, and the rule was discharged without costs awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22550</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>