<?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>2012 (6) TMI 266 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213946</link>
    <description>The Court ruled in favor of the Assessee on Issue 2, finding the capital expenditure classification vitiated due to undisclosed material. However, on Issue 3, the Court sided with the Revenue, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s method of apportioning expenses. The reference was disposed of, directing the Tribunal to proceed in accordance with the law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2012 13:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=187346" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (6) TMI 266 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213946</link>
      <description>The Court ruled in favor of the Assessee on Issue 2, finding the capital expenditure classification vitiated due to undisclosed material. However, on Issue 3, the Court sided with the Revenue, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s method of apportioning expenses. The reference was disposed of, directing the Tribunal to proceed in accordance with the law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213946</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>