<?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 (8) TMI 240 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215555</link>
    <description>The court upheld the requirement of actual payment under Section 43B of the Income Tax Act for claiming deductions, emphasizing that depositing bonus amounts into a separate bank account does not fulfill the criteria for deduction eligibility. The judgment clarified the distinction between actual payment and deemed payment, highlighting the importance of compliance with the statutory provisions for claiming deductions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Aug 2012 11:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=188941" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (8) TMI 240 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215555</link>
      <description>The court upheld the requirement of actual payment under Section 43B of the Income Tax Act for claiming deductions, emphasizing that depositing bonus amounts into a separate bank account does not fulfill the criteria for deduction eligibility. The judgment clarified the distinction between actual payment and deemed payment, highlighting the importance of compliance with the statutory provisions for claiming deductions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215555</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>