<?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>1994 (3) TMI 10 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18786</link>
    <description>Deduction for bad debt was unavailable where the assessee wrote off the debt only after the assessment for the relevant year had been completed, because the statutory condition under section 36(2) was not satisfied. The revised return was filed after the assessment order, and on the facts found by the Tribunal there was no basis to disturb the conclusion that the claim failed. The first question was answered in the affirmative and against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 19 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 10:37:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=57785" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (3) TMI 10 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18786</link>
      <description>Deduction for bad debt was unavailable where the assessee wrote off the debt only after the assessment for the relevant year had been completed, because the statutory condition under section 36(2) was not satisfied. The revised return was filed after the assessment order, and on the facts found by the Tribunal there was no basis to disturb the conclusion that the claim failed. The first question was answered in the affirmative and against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 19 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18786</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>