<?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>2000 (7) TMI 1 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5812</link>
    <description>Surtax liability is not an admissible deduction in computing total income, following the earlier decision in the assessee&#039;s own case, and that position was applied against the assessee. Distribution of physicians&#039; samples of prescription drugs to doctors was treated as publicity and sales promotion because it was directed at the real market for the drugs and intended to induce prescriptions, so the related expenditure fell within the restrictive scope of section 37(3A); the assessee&#039;s feedback argument and reliance on the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act were rejected. The Revenue&#039;s position was therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Dec 2025 20:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=44895" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (7) TMI 1 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5812</link>
      <description>Surtax liability is not an admissible deduction in computing total income, following the earlier decision in the assessee&#039;s own case, and that position was applied against the assessee. Distribution of physicians&#039; samples of prescription drugs to doctors was treated as publicity and sales promotion because it was directed at the real market for the drugs and intended to induce prescriptions, so the related expenditure fell within the restrictive scope of section 37(3A); the assessee&#039;s feedback argument and reliance on the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act were rejected. The Revenue&#039;s position was therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5812</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>