<?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>1997 (4) TMI 70 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17776</link>
    <description>The High Court affirmed the Tribunal&#039;s decision, limiting the disallowance to Rs. 600 instead of Rs. 6,600 as determined by the Income-tax Officer. It held that Rule 75(1) should restrict only the employer&#039;s contribution towards a recognized provident fund, allowing excess employer contributions to be disallowed. The court ruled in favor of the assessee, answering the legal question against the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 16:51:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=56776" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (4) TMI 70 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17776</link>
      <description>The High Court affirmed the Tribunal&#039;s decision, limiting the disallowance to Rs. 600 instead of Rs. 6,600 as determined by the Income-tax Officer. It held that Rule 75(1) should restrict only the employer&#039;s contribution towards a recognized provident fund, allowing excess employer contributions to be disallowed. The court ruled in favor of the assessee, answering the legal question against the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17776</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>