<?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 (4) TMI 638 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179321</link>
    <description>The appeal by Revenue against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal decision for Assessment Year 1985-86 was dismissed as it did not raise any substantial question of law on the issues involved, including expenses for project consultancy, welfare of employees, investment allowance, bad debts, and depreciation claims. The Tribunal&#039;s decisions were upheld based on its own reasoning and previous judgments in favor of the assessee from earlier assessment years.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2016 13:03:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=417699" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (4) TMI 638 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179321</link>
      <description>The appeal by Revenue against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal decision for Assessment Year 1985-86 was dismissed as it did not raise any substantial question of law on the issues involved, including expenses for project consultancy, welfare of employees, investment allowance, bad debts, and depreciation claims. The Tribunal&#039;s decisions were upheld based on its own reasoning and previous judgments in favor of the assessee from earlier assessment years.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179321</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>