<?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>2025 (4) TMI 1665 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462820</link>
    <description>Non-filing of a return under section 139 or in response to a notice under section 148 does not, by itself, bar an appeal under section 260A against a Tribunal order where a substantial question of law arises. The maintainability objection was rejected because section 260A permits an appeal from every Tribunal order satisfying that legal threshold, and the appeal was admitted on questions of law concerning the assessment and characterisation of receipts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2025 18:58:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=836861" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (4) TMI 1665 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462820</link>
      <description>Non-filing of a return under section 139 or in response to a notice under section 148 does not, by itself, bar an appeal under section 260A against a Tribunal order where a substantial question of law arises. The maintainability objection was rejected because section 260A permits an appeal from every Tribunal order satisfying that legal threshold, and the appeal was admitted on questions of law concerning the assessment and characterisation of receipts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462820</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>