<?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>1994 (12) TMI 115 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61864</link>
    <description>The appeal of the assessee was dismissed, and the cross-objection by the revenue was partly allowed. The Tribunal upheld the computation of the Assessing Officer in reducing the profits by 90% of the export earnings premium and brokerage for the purpose of deduction under section 80HHC. The Tribunal also held that while the export earnings premium should be included in the total turnover, the freight brokerage should not, as it effectively reduced the cost of freight and did not form part of the &quot;total turnover.&quot;</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 31 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Jan 2011 17:08:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=100310" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (12) TMI 115 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61864</link>
      <description>The appeal of the assessee was dismissed, and the cross-objection by the revenue was partly allowed. The Tribunal upheld the computation of the Assessing Officer in reducing the profits by 90% of the export earnings premium and brokerage for the purpose of deduction under section 80HHC. The Tribunal also held that while the export earnings premium should be included in the total turnover, the freight brokerage should not, as it effectively reduced the cost of freight and did not form part of the &quot;total turnover.&quot;</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 31 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61864</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>