<?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>1983 (9) TMI 26 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27668</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that penalties should be levied according to section 18(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, prior to its 1969 amendment for the assessment years in question. The judgment favored the assessee, emphasizing that penalties are determined based on the law applicable at the time of default. The reference was answered in favor of the assessee, and no costs were awarded due to the respondent&#039;s absence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Sep 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 12:42:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=66666" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (9) TMI 26 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27668</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that penalties should be levied according to section 18(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, prior to its 1969 amendment for the assessment years in question. The judgment favored the assessee, emphasizing that penalties are determined based on the law applicable at the time of default. The reference was answered in favor of the assessee, and no costs were awarded due to the respondent&#039;s absence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Sep 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27668</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>