<?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>1968 (10) TMI 18 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7436</link>
    <description>Wealth-tax was treated as a levy on ownership of assets, so it was not deductible in computing business profits. A contribution to a political party was held not to be a business deduction because it lacked the direct and intimate nexus required for expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for business purposes. Excess dividend tax arising from withdrawal of corporation tax rebate was treated as a valid statutory levy under the Finance Act, 1957. Legal charges paid to obtain a loan from the Industrial Finance Corporation were held to be revenue expenditure and therefore allowable, because they secured the use of money for a period without creating an enduring asset.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Oct 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=46486" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (10) TMI 18 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7436</link>
      <description>Wealth-tax was treated as a levy on ownership of assets, so it was not deductible in computing business profits. A contribution to a political party was held not to be a business deduction because it lacked the direct and intimate nexus required for expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for business purposes. Excess dividend tax arising from withdrawal of corporation tax rebate was treated as a valid statutory levy under the Finance Act, 1957. Legal charges paid to obtain a loan from the Industrial Finance Corporation were held to be revenue expenditure and therefore allowable, because they secured the use of money for a period without creating an enduring asset.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Oct 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7436</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>