<?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>1966 (4) TMI 3 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6682</link>
    <description>The High Court of Allahabad ruled that the payment of Rs. 56,000 by an assessee-company to the U.P. Congress Parliamentary Board for General Elections was not an admissible expenditure under section 10(2)(xv) of the Income-tax Act. The court found that there was no direct nexus between the contribution and the business purpose, leading to the rejection of the claim. The burden of proof was on the assessee to establish the expenditure&#039;s relevance to the business, which was not adequately demonstrated. The court directed the assessee to pay the department&#039;s costs and fixed the counsel&#039;s fee at Rs. 200.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Feb 2009 05:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=45763" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1966 (4) TMI 3 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6682</link>
      <description>The High Court of Allahabad ruled that the payment of Rs. 56,000 by an assessee-company to the U.P. Congress Parliamentary Board for General Elections was not an admissible expenditure under section 10(2)(xv) of the Income-tax Act. The court found that there was no direct nexus between the contribution and the business purpose, leading to the rejection of the claim. The burden of proof was on the assessee to establish the expenditure&#039;s relevance to the business, which was not adequately demonstrated. The court directed the assessee to pay the department&#039;s costs and fixed the counsel&#039;s fee at Rs. 200.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6682</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>