<?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>2013 (7) TMI 573 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235415</link>
    <description>The court upheld the application of rule 6DD(i) to protect the assessee&#039;s cash payments made to agents for raw cotton purchases, based on factual findings by the Tribunal and the first appellate authority. The court emphasized the commission charged by the payees and the commercial expediency in the transactions, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Jul 2013 10:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=197825" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (7) TMI 573 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235415</link>
      <description>The court upheld the application of rule 6DD(i) to protect the assessee&#039;s cash payments made to agents for raw cotton purchases, based on factual findings by the Tribunal and the first appellate authority. The court emphasized the commission charged by the payees and the commercial expediency in the transactions, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235415</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>