<?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>2000 (3) TMI 44 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15123</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the petition challenging the discount provision under section 269UA(b)(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, upholding its validity. However, it allowed the petition seeking payment of the balance consideration with interest, directing the appropriate authority to recalculate the discounted value from the date of tender of payment and pay the correct amount with 8% interest per annum from the judgment date until payment. No costs were ordered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 11:54:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54123" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (3) TMI 44 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15123</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the petition challenging the discount provision under section 269UA(b)(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, upholding its validity. However, it allowed the petition seeking payment of the balance consideration with interest, directing the appropriate authority to recalculate the discounted value from the date of tender of payment and pay the correct amount with 8% interest per annum from the judgment date until payment. No costs were ordered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15123</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>