<?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>2017 (3) TMI 111 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339608</link>
    <description>The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to allow expenses for repairs and maintenance as revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. The legal and professional fees were considered necessary for business operations and were deductible. The Court dismissed the appeal, finding no substantial question of law and emphasizing that the expenses contributed to increased turnover, justifying their treatment as revenue expenditure.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Aug 2017 10:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=460182" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 111 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339608</link>
      <description>The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to allow expenses for repairs and maintenance as revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. The legal and professional fees were considered necessary for business operations and were deductible. The Court dismissed the appeal, finding no substantial question of law and emphasizing that the expenses contributed to increased turnover, justifying their treatment as revenue expenditure.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339608</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>