<?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>2018 (1) TMI 956 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354220</link>
    <description>Contribution to an employees&#039; gratuity fund was deductible under section 36(1)(v) where the fund had already been created and satisfied the prescribed conditions, even though formal approval was granted later. The approval of a pre-existing trust was treated as relating back to the date the fund was set up, and the effective date could not be fixed arbitrarily when the approval itself recognised the date of application. Deduction could not be denied merely because the approval order was issued after the contribution. The alternative claim under section 37(1) failed because expenditure governed specifically by section 36 cannot be claimed under the general provision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Jan 2018 11:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=505485" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 956 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354220</link>
      <description>Contribution to an employees&#039; gratuity fund was deductible under section 36(1)(v) where the fund had already been created and satisfied the prescribed conditions, even though formal approval was granted later. The approval of a pre-existing trust was treated as relating back to the date the fund was set up, and the effective date could not be fixed arbitrarily when the approval itself recognised the date of application. Deduction could not be denied merely because the approval order was issued after the contribution. The alternative claim under section 37(1) failed because expenditure governed specifically by section 36 cannot be claimed under the general provision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354220</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>