<?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>2022 (11) TMI 1185 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430761</link>
    <description>The HC allowed the appeal against tax penalties, remanding the case to the Appellate Authority. The court found insufficient examination of mens rea in tax evasion allegations. The previous order was set aside, with directions for a fresh hearing, personal appearance, and reconsideration of tax and penalty imposition. The appellants were required to furnish a bond for the disputed tax amount.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=696961" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (11) TMI 1185 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430761</link>
      <description>The HC allowed the appeal against tax penalties, remanding the case to the Appellate Authority. The court found insufficient examination of mens rea in tax evasion allegations. The previous order was set aside, with directions for a fresh hearing, personal appearance, and reconsideration of tax and penalty imposition. The appellants were required to furnish a bond for the disputed tax amount.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430761</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>