<?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 (8) TMI 15 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383826</link>
    <description>The court ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the appeals and answering the substantial question of law in favor of the assessee. The court held that the assessee, operating as a franchisee of BSNL providing basic telecommunication services, was entitled to the deduction under Section 80 IA (4)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. This decision was based on precedents from similar cases, including Sabdhagiri Telecom Vs. Income Tax Officer and CIT Vs. Himanshu V. Shah, where deductions were allowed for similar operations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Aug 2019 15:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=581891" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 15 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383826</link>
      <description>The court ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the appeals and answering the substantial question of law in favor of the assessee. The court held that the assessee, operating as a franchisee of BSNL providing basic telecommunication services, was entitled to the deduction under Section 80 IA (4)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. This decision was based on precedents from similar cases, including Sabdhagiri Telecom Vs. Income Tax Officer and CIT Vs. Himanshu V. Shah, where deductions were allowed for similar operations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383826</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>