<?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>2022 (10) TMI 907 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429349</link>
    <description>The court upheld the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision disallowing the claim for protection under Section 41 of the Income Tax Act for the appellant for Assessment Years 2004-05 and 2005-06. The court ruled that the bad debts recovered by the appellant, previously written off by the amalgamating company, should be taxed in the appellant&#039;s hands. It emphasized that Section 41 should be considered a complete Code by itself and dismissed the appeals, affirming the Tribunal&#039;s order without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2022 22:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=694030" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (10) TMI 907 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429349</link>
      <description>The court upheld the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision disallowing the claim for protection under Section 41 of the Income Tax Act for the appellant for Assessment Years 2004-05 and 2005-06. The court ruled that the bad debts recovered by the appellant, previously written off by the amalgamating company, should be taxed in the appellant&#039;s hands. It emphasized that Section 41 should be considered a complete Code by itself and dismissed the appeals, affirming the Tribunal&#039;s order without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429349</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>