<?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 (10) TMI 660 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186189</link>
    <description>The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the compensation paid by the assessee to its clients as revenue expenditure. The Tribunal also deleted the addition of interest and guarantee commission as business expenditure. However, the Tribunal&#039;s decision regarding the treatment of compensation as revenue expenditure despite capitalization in earlier years, the chargeability of interest under Section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, and the allowance of advertisement expenses as revenue expenditure under the completed contract method raised questions of law. Additionally, a dispute over brokerage and commission against rental income was dismissed based on a previous Division Bench decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2016 15:49:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=440584" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (10) TMI 660 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186189</link>
      <description>The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the compensation paid by the assessee to its clients as revenue expenditure. The Tribunal also deleted the addition of interest and guarantee commission as business expenditure. However, the Tribunal&#039;s decision regarding the treatment of compensation as revenue expenditure despite capitalization in earlier years, the chargeability of interest under Section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, and the allowance of advertisement expenses as revenue expenditure under the completed contract method raised questions of law. Additionally, a dispute over brokerage and commission against rental income was dismissed based on a previous Division Bench decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186189</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>