<?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>2005 (5) TMI 550 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117544</link>
    <description>Double taxation cannot be sustained without verifying whether the same income was already assessed in another year, so the addition was left open for verification with relief to follow if duplication is found. Contribution paid to the legal heirs of a deceased employee was treated as business expenditure under section 37(1) because it was made as a prudent measure for employee welfare and workforce motivation, and the disallowance was deleted. Technical know-how expenditure and related foreign exchange fluctuation were held subject to section 40(a)(i), so deduction under section 35AB was allowed only on actual payment and compliance with tax deduction and remittance requirements; the matter was restored for recomputation and verification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Jun 2012 13:26:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154541" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (5) TMI 550 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117544</link>
      <description>Double taxation cannot be sustained without verifying whether the same income was already assessed in another year, so the addition was left open for verification with relief to follow if duplication is found. Contribution paid to the legal heirs of a deceased employee was treated as business expenditure under section 37(1) because it was made as a prudent measure for employee welfare and workforce motivation, and the disallowance was deleted. Technical know-how expenditure and related foreign exchange fluctuation were held subject to section 40(a)(i), so deduction under section 35AB was allowed only on actual payment and compliance with tax deduction and remittance requirements; the matter was restored for recomputation and verification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117544</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>