<?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 (9) TMI 75 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12192</link>
    <description>Interest earned on bank deposits made to secure letters of credit was held not to be income derived from the industrial undertaking because the phrase &quot;derived from&quot; requires a direct source nexus, not a merely incidental connection. As the immediate source of the interest was the deposit itself, the income did not qualify as profits derived from the undertaking and was not eligible for exemption under section 10A.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2025 15:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=51204" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (9) TMI 75 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12192</link>
      <description>Interest earned on bank deposits made to secure letters of credit was held not to be income derived from the industrial undertaking because the phrase &quot;derived from&quot; requires a direct source nexus, not a merely incidental connection. As the immediate source of the interest was the deposit itself, the income did not qualify as profits derived from the undertaking and was not eligible for exemption under section 10A.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12192</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>