<?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>2023 (6) TMI 989 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439415</link>
    <description>Section 65-B certification for electronic records is mandatory to establish source and authenticity, and where a party has taken all possible steps to obtain the certificate, the court should summon the person concerned and require its production. The trial court erred in stating that no such request had been made and in treating the application as belated, despite the party having specifically sought directions for records from the Income Tax Department. That rejection reflected non-application of mind and was perverse, so it was quashed. The trial court was directed to call upon the Income Tax Department to furnish the certificate for the documents, after which they could be considered in evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jun 2023 21:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=717490" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (6) TMI 989 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439415</link>
      <description>Section 65-B certification for electronic records is mandatory to establish source and authenticity, and where a party has taken all possible steps to obtain the certificate, the court should summon the person concerned and require its production. The trial court erred in stating that no such request had been made and in treating the application as belated, despite the party having specifically sought directions for records from the Income Tax Department. That rejection reflected non-application of mind and was perverse, so it was quashed. The trial court was directed to call upon the Income Tax Department to furnish the certificate for the documents, after which they could be considered in evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439415</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>