<?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 (8) TMI 72 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62246</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals for the assessment years 1988-89 and 1989-90. The disallowance of printing and publicity expenditure was reduced by granting a further discount. The disallowance of repairs expenditure was also reduced. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to amend the levy of interest under specific sections. Disallowances of water charges and office maintenance expenses were upheld but reduced. The issue of additional tax levy was sent back for clarification. The Tribunal deleted the levy of interest under certain sections and allowed depreciation on the studio as &#039;plant&#039;. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 Feb 2011 02:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=100692" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (8) TMI 72 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62246</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals for the assessment years 1988-89 and 1989-90. The disallowance of printing and publicity expenditure was reduced by granting a further discount. The disallowance of repairs expenditure was also reduced. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to amend the levy of interest under specific sections. Disallowances of water charges and office maintenance expenses were upheld but reduced. The issue of additional tax levy was sent back for clarification. The Tribunal deleted the levy of interest under certain sections and allowed depreciation on the studio as &#039;plant&#039;. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62246</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>