<?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>1980 (2) TMI 44 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36619</link>
    <description>The judgment clarified the Commissioner&#039;s powers under section 18(2A) of the Wealth Tax Act, affirming the maintainability of appeals despite the Commissioner&#039;s order. The Tribunal&#039;s consideration of the adequacy of opportunity before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was deemed irrelevant. It was held that the calculation of penalties should be based on the law applicable at the time of the default.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 14:57:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=75165" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (2) TMI 44 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36619</link>
      <description>The judgment clarified the Commissioner&#039;s powers under section 18(2A) of the Wealth Tax Act, affirming the maintainability of appeals despite the Commissioner&#039;s order. The Tribunal&#039;s consideration of the adequacy of opportunity before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was deemed irrelevant. It was held that the calculation of penalties should be based on the law applicable at the time of the default.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36619</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>