<?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 (7) TMI 46 - HIMACHAL PRADESH High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22993</link>
    <description>The court allowed the petition, quashed the Commissioner&#039;s order, and directed reconsideration of the petitioner&#039;s application under Section 18B(4) of the Wealth-tax Act. The court ruled that the petitioner can seek relief afresh under Section 18B(4) and that Section 18B(3) does not prevent the Commissioner from considering the application. Costs were assigned to the parties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:38:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=61992" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (7) TMI 46 - HIMACHAL PRADESH High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22993</link>
      <description>The court allowed the petition, quashed the Commissioner&#039;s order, and directed reconsideration of the petitioner&#039;s application under Section 18B(4) of the Wealth-tax Act. The court ruled that the petitioner can seek relief afresh under Section 18B(4) and that Section 18B(3) does not prevent the Commissioner from considering the application. Costs were assigned to the parties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22993</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>