<?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>2009 (10) TMI 601 - ITAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204807</link>
    <description>The appeal by the assessee was partly allowed. The Tribunal upheld the CIT&#039;s order on issues related to Vacancy Allowance, Agricultural Income, Expenditure on Leasehold Property, and Relief under Sections 80HHC and 80-IB. However, the Tribunal set aside the CIT&#039;s order on the issues of Property at Adyar and Reconciliation of Profits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Jun 2013 17:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=178335" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (10) TMI 601 - ITAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204807</link>
      <description>The appeal by the assessee was partly allowed. The Tribunal upheld the CIT&#039;s order on issues related to Vacancy Allowance, Agricultural Income, Expenditure on Leasehold Property, and Relief under Sections 80HHC and 80-IB. However, the Tribunal set aside the CIT&#039;s order on the issues of Property at Adyar and Reconciliation of Profits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204807</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>