<?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>1981 (10) TMI 17 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29058</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the interpretation of Rule 5(b), ruling that the Income Tax Officer&#039;s set off of appreciation against depreciation was improper. The full deduction claim of Rs. 4,52,510 was validated, and the benefit under sections 85 and 85A should be granted based on gross dividend income. The assessee was awarded costs, including a counsel fee of Rs. 500.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 15:28:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68055" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (10) TMI 17 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29058</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the interpretation of Rule 5(b), ruling that the Income Tax Officer&#039;s set off of appreciation against depreciation was improper. The full deduction claim of Rs. 4,52,510 was validated, and the benefit under sections 85 and 85A should be granted based on gross dividend income. The assessee was awarded costs, including a counsel fee of Rs. 500.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29058</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>