<?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 (6) TMI 797 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187695</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Miscellaneous Petition seeking the recall of an ex parte order due to the non-appearance of counsel. It held that the petitioner, a partnership firm, was ineligible for a deduction under Section 80-IA as it did not meet the specified criteria. The Tribunal emphasized that procedural rules should not be misused to challenge decisions made on merits, highlighting the importance of adherence to legal requirements in claiming deductions under the Income-tax Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Apr 2017 12:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=446561" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (6) TMI 797 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187695</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Miscellaneous Petition seeking the recall of an ex parte order due to the non-appearance of counsel. It held that the petitioner, a partnership firm, was ineligible for a deduction under Section 80-IA as it did not meet the specified criteria. The Tribunal emphasized that procedural rules should not be misused to challenge decisions made on merits, highlighting the importance of adherence to legal requirements in claiming deductions under the Income-tax Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187695</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>