<?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>2006 (7) TMI 201 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34656</link>
    <description>The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, holding that the conversion of outstanding interest into a term loan does not qualify as actual payment under section 43B of the Income-tax Act. The court emphasized the significance of legislative amendments, specifically Explanation 3C, in interpreting the provisions of the Act. The judgment highlighted the importance of considering legislative intent and statutory changes in resolving tax disputes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73273" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (7) TMI 201 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34656</link>
      <description>The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, holding that the conversion of outstanding interest into a term loan does not qualify as actual payment under section 43B of the Income-tax Act. The court emphasized the significance of legislative amendments, specifically Explanation 3C, in interpreting the provisions of the Act. The judgment highlighted the importance of considering legislative intent and statutory changes in resolving tax disputes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34656</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>