<?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>1986 (1) TMI 5 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5950</link>
    <description>Deduction for provision towards gratuity payable to employees was accepted as allowable, as the Tribunal correctly affirmed the Appellate Assistant Commissioner&#039;s allowance of the assessee&#039;s claim. The Court held that the governing position had already been correctly stated in an earlier decision and no distinguishing feature was shown by the Revenue. The deduction claim for gratuity liability was therefore upheld in favour of the assessee for the relevant assessment year.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jan 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2018 15:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=45033" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (1) TMI 5 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5950</link>
      <description>Deduction for provision towards gratuity payable to employees was accepted as allowable, as the Tribunal correctly affirmed the Appellate Assistant Commissioner&#039;s allowance of the assessee&#039;s claim. The Court held that the governing position had already been correctly stated in an earlier decision and no distinguishing feature was shown by the Revenue. The deduction claim for gratuity liability was therefore upheld in favour of the assessee for the relevant assessment year.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jan 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5950</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>