<?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>2008 (4) TMI 26 - High Court Punjab and Haryana</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3757</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that Section 44AE of the Income Tax Act applied to the assessee as the total number of trucks owned did not exceed ten during the relevant period. The Court dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, finding no substantial questions of law and affirming the factual findings supporting the applicability of Section 44AE to the assessee&#039;s business of trucks.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Jul 2013 11:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43105" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (4) TMI 26 - High Court Punjab and Haryana</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3757</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that Section 44AE of the Income Tax Act applied to the assessee as the total number of trucks owned did not exceed ten during the relevant period. The Court dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, finding no substantial questions of law and affirming the factual findings supporting the applicability of Section 44AE to the assessee&#039;s business of trucks.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3757</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>