<?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>1986 (8) TMI 115 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61368</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the deduction under section 80U for the practising advocate due to his permanent disability in the eyes, significantly reducing his earning capacity. The decision was supported by medical evidence, legal interpretations, and previous tribunal rulings, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 13:22:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=99815" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (8) TMI 115 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61368</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the deduction under section 80U for the practising advocate due to his permanent disability in the eyes, significantly reducing his earning capacity. The decision was supported by medical evidence, legal interpretations, and previous tribunal rulings, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61368</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>