<?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>2018 (12) TMI 1518 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372749</link>
    <description>The appeals filed by the Revenue against the ITAT order were dismissed, with the substantial questions of law resolved in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal&#039;s decision was deemed incorrect, and the CIT(A)&#039;s order was restored. The Court concluded that the charges in question did not constitute interest under the Interest Tax Act, aligning with previous rulings that distinguished between loans, advances, and other financial transactions. No costs were awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2024 11:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=549770" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 1518 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372749</link>
      <description>The appeals filed by the Revenue against the ITAT order were dismissed, with the substantial questions of law resolved in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal&#039;s decision was deemed incorrect, and the CIT(A)&#039;s order was restored. The Court concluded that the charges in question did not constitute interest under the Interest Tax Act, aligning with previous rulings that distinguished between loans, advances, and other financial transactions. No costs were awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372749</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>