<?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 (9) TMI 995 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5964</link>
    <description>Unpaid royalty liability falls within section 43B of the Income-tax Act because royalty is treated as tax for that purpose. The Court noted that although a later decision revisited the characterisation of royalty, it continued to follow the Constitution Bench ruling in India Cement, which remains the governing principle. On that basis, section 43B applies to unpaid royalty, and the assessee&#039;s challenge fails.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2018 16:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=45047" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (9) TMI 995 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5964</link>
      <description>Unpaid royalty liability falls within section 43B of the Income-tax Act because royalty is treated as tax for that purpose. The Court noted that although a later decision revisited the characterisation of royalty, it continued to follow the Constitution Bench ruling in India Cement, which remains the governing principle. On that basis, section 43B applies to unpaid royalty, and the assessee&#039;s challenge fails.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5964</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>