<?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>2008 (7) TMI 1078 - Delhi High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298359</link>
    <description>The Court dismissed the appeal challenging the validity of a warrant issued by the Addl. Director of IT (Inv.) under Section 132(1) of the IT Act, 1961 for the block period 1996-97 to 2002-03. The Tribunal held the warrant to be unauthorized based on the precedent set by a prior case, concluding that the Addl. Director lacked the power to issue such warrants. The Court, relying on the precedent established in the Dr. Nalini Mahajan case, found no need for further analysis and upheld the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Oct 2021 12:42:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=659707" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 1078 - Delhi High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298359</link>
      <description>The Court dismissed the appeal challenging the validity of a warrant issued by the Addl. Director of IT (Inv.) under Section 132(1) of the IT Act, 1961 for the block period 1996-97 to 2002-03. The Tribunal held the warrant to be unauthorized based on the precedent set by a prior case, concluding that the Addl. Director lacked the power to issue such warrants. The Court, relying on the precedent established in the Dr. Nalini Mahajan case, found no need for further analysis and upheld the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298359</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>