<?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>2006 (7) TMI 295 - ITAT PUNE-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71278</link>
    <description>Under the mercantile system, income accrues only when the right to receive becomes vested; a contingent or inchoate claim is not taxable until liability is finally determined. Applying that principle, excess levy sugar price and related interest were treated as accruing when the Government notifications finally fixed the amount in compliance with the Supreme Court&#039;s decision, so the amount became taxable in assessment year 1995-96. Expenditure on food and beverages treated as guest house maintenance, and expenditure on presentation articles treated as advertisement under Rule 6B, were both held to be covered by precedent and the disallowances were deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2011 12:41:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=109607" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (7) TMI 295 - ITAT PUNE-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71278</link>
      <description>Under the mercantile system, income accrues only when the right to receive becomes vested; a contingent or inchoate claim is not taxable until liability is finally determined. Applying that principle, excess levy sugar price and related interest were treated as accruing when the Government notifications finally fixed the amount in compliance with the Supreme Court&#039;s decision, so the amount became taxable in assessment year 1995-96. Expenditure on food and beverages treated as guest house maintenance, and expenditure on presentation articles treated as advertisement under Rule 6B, were both held to be covered by precedent and the disallowances were deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71278</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>