<?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>2017 (7) TMI 1486 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466780</link>
    <description>Immunity from penalty and prosecution under Section 245H(1) of the Income-tax Act is conditional on the Settlement Commission recording satisfaction that the applicant made full and true disclosure of income and explained the manner in which it was derived. Where that recorded satisfaction is absent, the grant of immunity cannot stand. The Delhi High Court therefore set aside the immunity component and remanded the matter to the Settlement Commission for fresh consideration of that question in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2026 13:56:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=887143" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 1486 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466780</link>
      <description>Immunity from penalty and prosecution under Section 245H(1) of the Income-tax Act is conditional on the Settlement Commission recording satisfaction that the applicant made full and true disclosure of income and explained the manner in which it was derived. Where that recorded satisfaction is absent, the grant of immunity cannot stand. The Delhi High Court therefore set aside the immunity component and remanded the matter to the Settlement Commission for fresh consideration of that question in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466780</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>