<?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>2014 (1) TMI 777 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242560</link>
    <description>Expenditure qualifies as fixed capital investment for exemption under section 4-A of the U.P. Trade Tax Act only where it has a direct nexus with the industrial undertaking and supports acquisition, setup, or efficient functioning of the unit. Railway siding, additional silos, lease rent, and interest on deferred instalments were treated as admissible because they were linked to industrial operations and occupation of the site. By contrast, approval charges for land drawing, fly ash extraction system expenses, tempo traveller costs, technical study charges, most pre-operative expenses, and railway-side layout and drawing were disallowed as recurring, unrelated, or not shown to be capital investment. The Tribunal&#039;s partial allowance and disallowance were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2014 12:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=342899" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 777 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242560</link>
      <description>Expenditure qualifies as fixed capital investment for exemption under section 4-A of the U.P. Trade Tax Act only where it has a direct nexus with the industrial undertaking and supports acquisition, setup, or efficient functioning of the unit. Railway siding, additional silos, lease rent, and interest on deferred instalments were treated as admissible because they were linked to industrial operations and occupation of the site. By contrast, approval charges for land drawing, fly ash extraction system expenses, tempo traveller costs, technical study charges, most pre-operative expenses, and railway-side layout and drawing were disallowed as recurring, unrelated, or not shown to be capital investment. The Tribunal&#039;s partial allowance and disallowance were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242560</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>