<?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>1992 (6) TMI 84 - ITAT MADRAS-C</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70026</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the deduction claim under section 80HHC based on turnover increase. It held that as a successor-in-title, the assessee could claim the deduction using the turnover of the predecessor firm. The decision emphasized interpreting tax provisions to encourage exports and ensuring fair application of the law to support taxpayers&#039; legitimate claims.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2011 15:15:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=108379" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (6) TMI 84 - ITAT MADRAS-C</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70026</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the deduction claim under section 80HHC based on turnover increase. It held that as a successor-in-title, the assessee could claim the deduction using the turnover of the predecessor firm. The decision emphasized interpreting tax provisions to encourage exports and ensuring fair application of the law to support taxpayers&#039; legitimate claims.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70026</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>