<?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>2008 (9) TMI 196 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32741</link>
    <description>The court held that physical presence outside India is necessary to claim a deduction under Section 80RRA of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court emphasized a literal interpretation of the section and the legislative intent behind it. The court set aside the impugned order and dismissed the writ petitions, as the respondents did not fulfill the principal condition of rendering services outside India.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=71379" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (9) TMI 196 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32741</link>
      <description>The court held that physical presence outside India is necessary to claim a deduction under Section 80RRA of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court emphasized a literal interpretation of the section and the legislative intent behind it. The court set aside the impugned order and dismissed the writ petitions, as the respondents did not fulfill the principal condition of rendering services outside India.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32741</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>