<?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 (9) TMI 290 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33840</link>
    <description>The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, holding that the appellate authority does not have jurisdiction to examine the validity of search and seizure actions under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act. The court emphasized that such matters should be addressed separately from the assessment process. The cross-objections filed by the assessee were dismissed, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72468" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (9) TMI 290 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33840</link>
      <description>The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, holding that the appellate authority does not have jurisdiction to examine the validity of search and seizure actions under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act. The court emphasized that such matters should be addressed separately from the assessment process. The cross-objections filed by the assessee were dismissed, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33840</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>