<?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 (8) TMI 107 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23067</link>
    <description>Limitation for a reference application under the Wealth-tax Act ran from service of the order refusing reference, and the application was held to be in time because the relevant order was received by the proper office of the Commissioner on the asserted date with no earlier valid service proved. On the merits of reference, the Tribunal&#039;s finding of no concealment and voluntary filing of the revised return rested on factual findings that the property value had been disclosed in the spouse&#039;s return and the assessee corrected the position on discovery of the true facts; such findings of fact, including absence of mens rea, did not give rise to a referable question of law. The reference application therefore failed on the concealment issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:00:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=62066" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (8) TMI 107 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23067</link>
      <description>Limitation for a reference application under the Wealth-tax Act ran from service of the order refusing reference, and the application was held to be in time because the relevant order was received by the proper office of the Commissioner on the asserted date with no earlier valid service proved. On the merits of reference, the Tribunal&#039;s finding of no concealment and voluntary filing of the revised return rested on factual findings that the property value had been disclosed in the spouse&#039;s return and the assessee corrected the position on discovery of the true facts; such findings of fact, including absence of mens rea, did not give rise to a referable question of law. The reference application therefore failed on the concealment issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23067</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>