<?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 (8) TMI 1767 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278795</link>
    <description>The Allahabad High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision regarding the carry forward of losses under the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2007-08, amounting to Rs. 7,59,46,064. The Court found that the assessee had filed returns within the time limit, even though initially using an old form, and later complying with the new form requirements. As there was no unfair advantage sought, the Court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the significance of factual findings and procedural compliance in tax cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2019 06:13:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=559127" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 1767 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278795</link>
      <description>The Allahabad High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision regarding the carry forward of losses under the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2007-08, amounting to Rs. 7,59,46,064. The Court found that the assessee had filed returns within the time limit, even though initially using an old form, and later complying with the new form requirements. As there was no unfair advantage sought, the Court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the significance of factual findings and procedural compliance in tax cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278795</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>