<?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>2015 (2) TMI 1416 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461182</link>
    <description>A provision made for non-performing assets treated as irrecoverable is not deductible as a bad debt because binding precedent, applying Supreme Court principles, excludes such claim. The same provision is also not allowable as a business loss on the same reasoning. The disallowance of the deduction was therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2025 18:23:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=807518" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (2) TMI 1416 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461182</link>
      <description>A provision made for non-performing assets treated as irrecoverable is not deductible as a bad debt because binding precedent, applying Supreme Court principles, excludes such claim. The same provision is also not allowable as a business loss on the same reasoning. The disallowance of the deduction was therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461182</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>