<?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>2008 (6) TMI 344 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77893</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court held that excise duty and sales tax should not be included in turnover for deduction under section 80HHC. Additionally, the windmill subsidy was deemed a capital receipt and should not be added to the cost of the asset for taxation purposes or depreciation calculations. The Court relied on precedents to dismiss all three appeals by the Revenue, affirming the decisions of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116048" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (6) TMI 344 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77893</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court held that excise duty and sales tax should not be included in turnover for deduction under section 80HHC. Additionally, the windmill subsidy was deemed a capital receipt and should not be added to the cost of the asset for taxation purposes or depreciation calculations. The Court relied on precedents to dismiss all three appeals by the Revenue, affirming the decisions of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77893</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>