<?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 (5) TMI 2330 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=472251</link>
    <description>Interference with dismissal of a miscellaneous application for non-appearance was not warranted prima facie because the assessee did not provide a proper explanation for its absence. The appellant could seek restoration of the application before the Tribunal within the stipulated period. The substantial questions of law remained unadjudicated and were left open.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2026 19:38:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=928013" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 2330 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=472251</link>
      <description>Interference with dismissal of a miscellaneous application for non-appearance was not warranted prima facie because the assessee did not provide a proper explanation for its absence. The appellant could seek restoration of the application before the Tribunal within the stipulated period. The substantial questions of law remained unadjudicated and were left open.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=472251</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>