<?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>1986 (10) TMI 18 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25692</link>
    <description>A question of law arose from the Tribunal&#039;s refusal to make a reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act on the assessee&#039;s exposure to penalty for concealment under section 271(1)(c). The High Court found that, on the facts and circumstances, whether failure to substantiate deductions amounts to concealment of particulars of income was a referable legal issue. It therefore required the Tribunal to state the case and refer the question to the Court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 12:14:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=64690" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (10) TMI 18 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25692</link>
      <description>A question of law arose from the Tribunal&#039;s refusal to make a reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act on the assessee&#039;s exposure to penalty for concealment under section 271(1)(c). The High Court found that, on the facts and circumstances, whether failure to substantiate deductions amounts to concealment of particulars of income was a referable legal issue. It therefore required the Tribunal to state the case and refer the question to the Court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25692</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>