<?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 (3) TMI 49 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23463</link>
    <description>The court found the sale of the petitioner&#039;s property to be void due to attachment and the incorrect tax clearance certificate obtained by the vendors, in accordance with rule 16 of Schedule II to the Income-tax Act. The Tax Recovery Officer was permitted to proceed with recovering taxes from the vendors through the property. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to appeal the decision within 30 days to the Commissioner of Income-tax as per rule 86 of Schedule II.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Dec 2009 15:07:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=62461" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (3) TMI 49 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23463</link>
      <description>The court found the sale of the petitioner&#039;s property to be void due to attachment and the incorrect tax clearance certificate obtained by the vendors, in accordance with rule 16 of Schedule II to the Income-tax Act. The Tax Recovery Officer was permitted to proceed with recovering taxes from the vendors through the property. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to appeal the decision within 30 days to the Commissioner of Income-tax as per rule 86 of Schedule II.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23463</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>