<?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>2013 (9) TMI 736 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237304</link>
    <description>Incentive received under the Sampat Incentive Scheme was held to be a capital receipt because the scheme linked the benefit to repayment of loans used for new units or substantial expansion, making it connected with the profit-making apparatus rather than ordinary trading income. Deduction for productivity linked incentive bonus was denied for the unpaid amount because such a business deduction is allowable only on actual payment, with relief available in the year of payment. The reference was therefore answered partly in favour of the assessee on the receipt characterisation and partly against it on the deduction claim.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2013 21:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=199711" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (9) TMI 736 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237304</link>
      <description>Incentive received under the Sampat Incentive Scheme was held to be a capital receipt because the scheme linked the benefit to repayment of loans used for new units or substantial expansion, making it connected with the profit-making apparatus rather than ordinary trading income. Deduction for productivity linked incentive bonus was denied for the unpaid amount because such a business deduction is allowable only on actual payment, with relief available in the year of payment. The reference was therefore answered partly in favour of the assessee on the receipt characterisation and partly against it on the deduction claim.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237304</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>