<?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>1984 (8) TMI 44 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27280</link>
    <description>The High Court disagreed with the Tribunal&#039;s decision and held that the letter dated July 28, 1962, should be considered a valid certificate under section 197(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Consequently, the Income-tax Officer&#039;s action under section 201 was deemed improper. The Court ruled in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue on issues 1, 2, 3, and 4, while questions 5, 6, and 7 were left unanswered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 18:18:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=66278" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (8) TMI 44 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27280</link>
      <description>The High Court disagreed with the Tribunal&#039;s decision and held that the letter dated July 28, 1962, should be considered a valid certificate under section 197(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Consequently, the Income-tax Officer&#039;s action under section 201 was deemed improper. The Court ruled in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue on issues 1, 2, 3, and 4, while questions 5, 6, and 7 were left unanswered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27280</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>