<?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>2019 (4) TMI 371 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377927</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the appeals in T.C.A.Nos. 2674 to 2676 of 2006 and partly allowed the appeals in T.C.A.Nos. 2677 to 2679. The court ruled in favor of the Revenue on most issues, except for partially allowing the inclusion of interest and lease income under Clause (baa) of the Explanation to Section 80HHC.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2020 17:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=565726" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 371 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377927</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the appeals in T.C.A.Nos. 2674 to 2676 of 2006 and partly allowed the appeals in T.C.A.Nos. 2677 to 2679. The court ruled in favor of the Revenue on most issues, except for partially allowing the inclusion of interest and lease income under Clause (baa) of the Explanation to Section 80HHC.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377927</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>