<?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 (11) TMI 110 - ITAT DELHI-E</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64914</link>
    <description>City compensatory allowance was examined against binding Delhi High Court authority and treated as not exempt from tax. The commentary also considers whether repayment of instalments of a loan taken from the general provident fund, when deducted from salary and credited to the employee&#039;s provident fund account, qualifies as a contribution deductible under section 80C. It explains that such repayments may satisfy the statutory requirement of payment out of taxable income and credit to the provident fund account, and that the double-deduction objection was rejected because the repayments were treated as distinct from earlier annual contributions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 11:21:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=103354" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (11) TMI 110 - ITAT DELHI-E</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64914</link>
      <description>City compensatory allowance was examined against binding Delhi High Court authority and treated as not exempt from tax. The commentary also considers whether repayment of instalments of a loan taken from the general provident fund, when deducted from salary and credited to the employee&#039;s provident fund account, qualifies as a contribution deductible under section 80C. It explains that such repayments may satisfy the statutory requirement of payment out of taxable income and credit to the provident fund account, and that the double-deduction objection was rejected because the repayments were treated as distinct from earlier annual contributions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64914</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>