<?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>1979 (3) TMI 46 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37440</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the petition challenging assessment orders for interest liability under the Income Tax Act, 1961, for registered partnership firms. The court held that the provision treating registered firms differently from unregistered firms did not violate Article 14 of the Constitution. It emphasized that the legislature can selectively grant privileges, and requiring registered firms to pay interest as unregistered firms in certain cases was not discriminatory. The court found the provision valid and non-discriminatory, upholding the assessment orders and ordering the refund of the security amount to the petitioner without awarding costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 16:42:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=75986" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (3) TMI 46 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37440</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the petition challenging assessment orders for interest liability under the Income Tax Act, 1961, for registered partnership firms. The court held that the provision treating registered firms differently from unregistered firms did not violate Article 14 of the Constitution. It emphasized that the legislature can selectively grant privileges, and requiring registered firms to pay interest as unregistered firms in certain cases was not discriminatory. The court found the provision valid and non-discriminatory, upholding the assessment orders and ordering the refund of the security amount to the petitioner without awarding costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37440</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>