<?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>1988 (3) TMI 38 - ORISSA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24917</link>
    <description>Following the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975, effective from 1 April 1976, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner ceased to be the competent authority to impose penalty under section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. Applying the earlier binding decision on the same issue, the court treated penalty orders passed after that date as lacking jurisdictional support. The result was that penalty proceedings culminating in orders made in March 1977 could not be sustained by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Jan 2010 12:09:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=63915" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (3) TMI 38 - ORISSA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24917</link>
      <description>Following the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975, effective from 1 April 1976, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner ceased to be the competent authority to impose penalty under section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. Applying the earlier binding decision on the same issue, the court treated penalty orders passed after that date as lacking jurisdictional support. The result was that penalty proceedings culminating in orders made in March 1977 could not be sustained by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24917</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>