<?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>2007 (11) TMI 70 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3343</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the appeal in part, ruling that the payment to the consultancy firm was genuine and qualified for deduction under the Income-tax Act. However, the Court upheld the decision on the payment to the real estate group, stating that the stamp duty payment issue could not be interfered with based on the presented facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42695" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (11) TMI 70 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3343</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the appeal in part, ruling that the payment to the consultancy firm was genuine and qualified for deduction under the Income-tax Act. However, the Court upheld the decision on the payment to the real estate group, stating that the stamp duty payment issue could not be interfered with based on the presented facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3343</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>