<?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>2002 (10) TMI 40 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11960</link>
    <description>The court held that the assessee&#039;s activities of cutting jumbo rolls into smaller sizes did not amount to manufacturing or production. Consequently, the assessee was not entitled to the investment allowance under section 32A for the assessment year 1986-87 or the deduction under section 80-I for the assessment year 1987-88. The court ruled in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 12:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=50972" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (10) TMI 40 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11960</link>
      <description>The court held that the assessee&#039;s activities of cutting jumbo rolls into smaller sizes did not amount to manufacturing or production. Consequently, the assessee was not entitled to the investment allowance under section 32A for the assessment year 1986-87 or the deduction under section 80-I for the assessment year 1987-88. The court ruled in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11960</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>