<?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>2008 (10) TMI 642 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176146</link>
    <description>Section 10BA was applied to handmade wooden handicraft exports by treating assembling, shaping, carving, inlay work and polishing as manufacture or production of a commercially distinct product with artistic value, so the deduction was available. The later binding view was followed for Section 80HHC, requiring computation without first reducing the Section 80-IB deduction. Duty drawback was included in business profits for Section 80-IB on the basis of precedent. Interest disallowance under Section 40A(2)(b) was deleted for lack of proof that the payment was excessive or unreasonable, while other expense disallowances were either upheld for want of exclusive business use or rendered infructuous by the Section 10BA relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 17:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=408976" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (10) TMI 642 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176146</link>
      <description>Section 10BA was applied to handmade wooden handicraft exports by treating assembling, shaping, carving, inlay work and polishing as manufacture or production of a commercially distinct product with artistic value, so the deduction was available. The later binding view was followed for Section 80HHC, requiring computation without first reducing the Section 80-IB deduction. Duty drawback was included in business profits for Section 80-IB on the basis of precedent. Interest disallowance under Section 40A(2)(b) was deleted for lack of proof that the payment was excessive or unreasonable, while other expense disallowances were either upheld for want of exclusive business use or rendered infructuous by the Section 10BA relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176146</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>