<?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>1989 (8) TMI 24 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23311</link>
    <description>The court found the notice issued under section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act to be invalid as it did not comply with the mandatory requirements of section 22. It emphasized the necessity of providing a notice and an opportunity to be heard before determining a person&#039;s status as an agent. The court quashed the notice, highlighting the importance of adhering to statutory provisions and principles of natural justice. The petition was allowed without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:24:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=62310" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (8) TMI 24 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23311</link>
      <description>The court found the notice issued under section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act to be invalid as it did not comply with the mandatory requirements of section 22. It emphasized the necessity of providing a notice and an opportunity to be heard before determining a person&#039;s status as an agent. The court quashed the notice, highlighting the importance of adhering to statutory provisions and principles of natural justice. The petition was allowed without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23311</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>