<?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>1991 (1) TMI 11 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21363</link>
    <description>The court ruled against the assessee, affirming that they were not entitled to set-off unabsorbed depreciation for specific assessment years in the subsequent year due to the finality of earlier assessments. The court also held that the assessee could not re-agitate the issue in the subsequent year. The court deemed the reference to Section 80 of the Income-tax Act unnecessary and left the third question unanswered. The Revenue was awarded costs of Rs. 500.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:40:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=60362" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (1) TMI 11 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21363</link>
      <description>The court ruled against the assessee, affirming that they were not entitled to set-off unabsorbed depreciation for specific assessment years in the subsequent year due to the finality of earlier assessments. The court also held that the assessee could not re-agitate the issue in the subsequent year. The court deemed the reference to Section 80 of the Income-tax Act unnecessary and left the third question unanswered. The Revenue was awarded costs of Rs. 500.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21363</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>