<?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>2002 (4) TMI 19 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11780</link>
    <description>The court ruled in favor of the assessee, determining that the premium received from export houses was part of the export price and not a separate commission or brokerage. The Tribunal&#039;s reliance on past decisions was found to be misplaced, and the application of Section 80AB was deemed unnecessary given the specific provisions of Section 80HHC. The questions raised were answered against the Revenue, affirming the assessee&#039;s position.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=50793" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (4) TMI 19 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11780</link>
      <description>The court ruled in favor of the assessee, determining that the premium received from export houses was part of the export price and not a separate commission or brokerage. The Tribunal&#039;s reliance on past decisions was found to be misplaced, and the application of Section 80AB was deemed unnecessary given the specific provisions of Section 80HHC. The questions raised were answered against the Revenue, affirming the assessee&#039;s position.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11780</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>