<?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>1989 (11) TMI 96 - ITAT DELHI-E</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64934</link>
    <description>Interest on a deposit was held not to be assessable as undisclosed income because the basis for the addition was not established, and the disallowance was deleted. Entertainment expenditure was allowed only for non-entertainment items such as sweets and similar articles; the balance disallowance was sustained, except for Rs. 11,688. Miscellaneous expenses were partly allowed where stationery and photostat expenses during tour were treated as deductible, resulting in deletion of Rs. 1,217. Weighted deduction was allowed for mandatory export inspection fee paid to a Government-appointed statutory agency, because compulsory use of that inspection mechanism satisfied the statutory quality-control requirement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 12:26:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=103374" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (11) TMI 96 - ITAT DELHI-E</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64934</link>
      <description>Interest on a deposit was held not to be assessable as undisclosed income because the basis for the addition was not established, and the disallowance was deleted. Entertainment expenditure was allowed only for non-entertainment items such as sweets and similar articles; the balance disallowance was sustained, except for Rs. 11,688. Miscellaneous expenses were partly allowed where stationery and photostat expenses during tour were treated as deductible, resulting in deletion of Rs. 1,217. Weighted deduction was allowed for mandatory export inspection fee paid to a Government-appointed statutory agency, because compulsory use of that inspection mechanism satisfied the statutory quality-control requirement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64934</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>