<?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>2012 (9) TMI 842 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217034</link>
    <description>The Court dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal against the ITAT order allowing deduction of upfront fee and bank charges under Section 40(a)(ii). The Court upheld the ITAT&#039;s decision, emphasizing that the payment of taxes was integral to the consideration for acquiring the know-how, in line with Section 35AB. The Court found no substantial question of law and affirmed the allowance of the deduction, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2026 14:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=190412" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (9) TMI 842 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217034</link>
      <description>The Court dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal against the ITAT order allowing deduction of upfront fee and bank charges under Section 40(a)(ii). The Court upheld the ITAT&#039;s decision, emphasizing that the payment of taxes was integral to the consideration for acquiring the know-how, in line with Section 35AB. The Court found no substantial question of law and affirmed the allowance of the deduction, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217034</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>