<?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>1980 (9) TMI 106 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55828</link>
    <description>Under section 249(4)(a) of the Income-tax Act, an assessee may be exempted from the precondition of paying tax on returned income before an appeal is admitted where good and sufficient reason exists. Here, the Tribunal noted that the assessee&#039;s assets, including seized silver and other property under forfeiture proceedings, were not shown to be immediately realisable, and the agricultural income relied upon was not available for prompt payment of the admitted tax liability. On those facts, the statutory proviso for exemption ought to have been applied. The rejection of the appeal for non-payment of tax on returned income was therefore unjustified, and exemption from compliance was held to be available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Nov 2010 13:10:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=94290" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (9) TMI 106 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55828</link>
      <description>Under section 249(4)(a) of the Income-tax Act, an assessee may be exempted from the precondition of paying tax on returned income before an appeal is admitted where good and sufficient reason exists. Here, the Tribunal noted that the assessee&#039;s assets, including seized silver and other property under forfeiture proceedings, were not shown to be immediately realisable, and the agricultural income relied upon was not available for prompt payment of the admitted tax liability. On those facts, the statutory proviso for exemption ought to have been applied. The rejection of the appeal for non-payment of tax on returned income was therefore unjustified, and exemption from compliance was held to be available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55828</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>