<?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>2009 (12) TMI 46 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35375</link>
    <description>The High Court held that the assessee could adjust the MAT credit before charging interest under sections 234B &amp;amp; 234C, aligning with previous rulings. It was determined that the MAT credit should take precedence over tax payable, in accordance with the Act&#039;s provisions rather than Form 1&#039;s scheme. The Court dismissed the appeals against the revenue, emphasizing the correct order of adjustments and upholding consistency with established legal interpretations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73962" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (12) TMI 46 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35375</link>
      <description>The High Court held that the assessee could adjust the MAT credit before charging interest under sections 234B &amp;amp; 234C, aligning with previous rulings. It was determined that the MAT credit should take precedence over tax payable, in accordance with the Act&#039;s provisions rather than Form 1&#039;s scheme. The Court dismissed the appeals against the revenue, emphasizing the correct order of adjustments and upholding consistency with established legal interpretations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35375</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>