<?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>1963 (5) TMI 2 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49402</link>
    <description>Proceeding against a receiver for recovery of income-tax arrears was permitted where the same person, Bibhuti Bhusan Sen, had again been appointed receiver and had been one of the assessees for the relevant assessment years. In those circumstances, the issue of proceeding against a later receiver who had not been assessed did not arise, and the broader construction of section 41(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was left undecided. The appeals succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 May 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2014 17:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=87882" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1963 (5) TMI 2 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49402</link>
      <description>Proceeding against a receiver for recovery of income-tax arrears was permitted where the same person, Bibhuti Bhusan Sen, had again been appointed receiver and had been one of the assessees for the relevant assessment years. In those circumstances, the issue of proceeding against a later receiver who had not been assessed did not arise, and the broader construction of section 41(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was left undecided. The appeals succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 May 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49402</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>