<?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 (11) TMI 890 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334872</link>
    <description>The High Court ruled against the assessee on car and telephone bill expenses, salary to the wife, and R&amp;amp;D expenses, upholding the decisions of the Assessing Officer and Tribunal. However, the Court ruled in favor of the assessee on advertisement expenses, remitting the matter for further assessment to determine reasonableness.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2017 18:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=448746" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 890 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334872</link>
      <description>The High Court ruled against the assessee on car and telephone bill expenses, salary to the wife, and R&amp;amp;D expenses, upholding the decisions of the Assessing Officer and Tribunal. However, the Court ruled in favor of the assessee on advertisement expenses, remitting the matter for further assessment to determine reasonableness.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334872</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>