<?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>1992 (12) TMI 114 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71806</link>
    <description>Section 37(2A) was to be applied by computing the prescribed limits on profits and gains of business or profession before giving effect to investment allowance under section 32A. The provision was read as requiring the disallowance base to be determined on pre-section 32A business profits, and the commentary treated that construction as clear and consistent with the statutory text. The resulting effect was that the deduction under section 37(2A) had to be recomputed on that basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Apr 2011 11:47:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=110127" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (12) TMI 114 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71806</link>
      <description>Section 37(2A) was to be applied by computing the prescribed limits on profits and gains of business or profession before giving effect to investment allowance under section 32A. The provision was read as requiring the disallowance base to be determined on pre-section 32A business profits, and the commentary treated that construction as clear and consistent with the statutory text. The resulting effect was that the deduction under section 37(2A) had to be recomputed on that basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71806</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>