<?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 (4) TMI 32 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24931</link>
    <description>The partnership firm petitioners challenged the rejection of their application for waiver of interest and penalties under section 273A of the Income-tax Act. The Commissioner of Income-tax had denied the waiver, stating that the section only applied to concealed income disclosures, not routine return delays. The petitioners argued they met all conditions of section 273A, citing past cases and interpretations that supported their position. The court agreed with the petitioners, finding that the language of section 273A did not limit its application to concealed income disclosures. The petitioners succeeded in their challenge, and the respondents were ordered to pay costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Apr 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Jan 2010 12:37:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=63929" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (4) TMI 32 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24931</link>
      <description>The partnership firm petitioners challenged the rejection of their application for waiver of interest and penalties under section 273A of the Income-tax Act. The Commissioner of Income-tax had denied the waiver, stating that the section only applied to concealed income disclosures, not routine return delays. The petitioners argued they met all conditions of section 273A, citing past cases and interpretations that supported their position. The court agreed with the petitioners, finding that the language of section 273A did not limit its application to concealed income disclosures. The petitioners succeeded in their challenge, and the respondents were ordered to pay costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Apr 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24931</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>