<?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>1976 (5) TMI 14 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39171</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that assessments after the death of the assessee, without notice to legal representatives, should not be annulled. The Court ruled in favor of continuing assessments against the legal representative as per Section 159 of the Income-tax Act, holding them liable for the deceased assessee&#039;s tax obligations. The judgment, delivered by Judges Dipak Kumar Sen and S. C. Deb, affirmed that assessments should proceed against the legal representative without annulment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 May 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Apr 2010 13:45:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=77717" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (5) TMI 14 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39171</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that assessments after the death of the assessee, without notice to legal representatives, should not be annulled. The Court ruled in favor of continuing assessments against the legal representative as per Section 159 of the Income-tax Act, holding them liable for the deceased assessee&#039;s tax obligations. The judgment, delivered by Judges Dipak Kumar Sen and S. C. Deb, affirmed that assessments should proceed against the legal representative without annulment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 May 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39171</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>