<?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>2016 (9) TMI 953 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332692</link>
    <description>The court allowed the business expenditure on articles presented to dealers, interest from others, and IDBI was included as business profit for deduction. The addition on account of advances of interest-free loans to associated concerns was not deleted. The deletion of addition made on account of closing stock, spares, tools, etc., was upheld. However, expenses on foreign travel of Directors&#039; wives were not allowed as business expenses. Proportionate management expenses allocated against dividend income for deduction under section 80M were upheld. The appeal was disposed of with some questions answered in favor of the assessee and others in favor of the department.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 May 2017 12:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=442601" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 953 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332692</link>
      <description>The court allowed the business expenditure on articles presented to dealers, interest from others, and IDBI was included as business profit for deduction. The addition on account of advances of interest-free loans to associated concerns was not deleted. The deletion of addition made on account of closing stock, spares, tools, etc., was upheld. However, expenses on foreign travel of Directors&#039; wives were not allowed as business expenses. Proportionate management expenses allocated against dividend income for deduction under section 80M were upheld. The appeal was disposed of with some questions answered in favor of the assessee and others in favor of the department.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332692</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>