<?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>2005 (7) TMI 733 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311306</link>
    <description>Interest under Sec. 214/244(1A) was held payable up to the date of adjustment, not merely up to the date of the order giving effect to the CIT(A)&#039;s decision. The HC found the statutory language clear and agreed that the Tribunal was justified in confirming the CIT(A)&#039;s direction to the Assessing Officer to compute interest accordingly. As the provision admitted of no ambiguity, no substantial question of law arose for consideration, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Dec 2023 11:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=735696" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (7) TMI 733 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311306</link>
      <description>Interest under Sec. 214/244(1A) was held payable up to the date of adjustment, not merely up to the date of the order giving effect to the CIT(A)&#039;s decision. The HC found the statutory language clear and agreed that the Tribunal was justified in confirming the CIT(A)&#039;s direction to the Assessing Officer to compute interest accordingly. As the provision admitted of no ambiguity, no substantial question of law arose for consideration, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311306</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>