<?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>1984 (11) TMI 99 - ITAT BOMBAY-C</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58571</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that penalty proceedings under section 15B of the Wealth-tax Act could not be initiated against the legal representative of a deceased assessee posthumously. Relying on legal precedent and strict interpretation of penalty provisions, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the legal representative, emphasizing that liability on the representative should not be created after the assessee&#039;s death. Additionally, the Tribunal clarified that while the legal representative could claim refunds under section 15C(2), the initiation of penalty proceedings required explicit provisions in the Act, ultimately dismissing the appeal against the executrix of the deceased.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 24 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Dec 2010 16:44:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=97028" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (11) TMI 99 - ITAT BOMBAY-C</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58571</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that penalty proceedings under section 15B of the Wealth-tax Act could not be initiated against the legal representative of a deceased assessee posthumously. Relying on legal precedent and strict interpretation of penalty provisions, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the legal representative, emphasizing that liability on the representative should not be created after the assessee&#039;s death. Additionally, the Tribunal clarified that while the legal representative could claim refunds under section 15C(2), the initiation of penalty proceedings required explicit provisions in the Act, ultimately dismissing the appeal against the executrix of the deceased.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 24 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58571</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>