<?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>2020 (3) TMI 880 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393736</link>
    <description>The High Court affirmed the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision to classify franchise fees as business income rather than income from house property. The Court relied on a previous judgment involving the same appellant and emphasized the distinction between property leasing and business operations. The appeals were dismissed, and no costs were awarded, providing clarity on income classification principles for similar transactions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2020 13:15:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=607657" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (3) TMI 880 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393736</link>
      <description>The High Court affirmed the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision to classify franchise fees as business income rather than income from house property. The Court relied on a previous judgment involving the same appellant and emphasized the distinction between property leasing and business operations. The appeals were dismissed, and no costs were awarded, providing clarity on income classification principles for similar transactions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393736</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>