<?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>1949 (9) TMI 25 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200804</link>
    <description>A payment made to secure a proposed cinema lease was treated as advance rent rather than salami or premium, because its true character was a deposit linked to an expected business lease arrangement and not consideration for acquiring a capital asset. On that basis, the amount was regarded as expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose of earning business profits and was deductible in computing business income. The reference was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Sep 1949 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2018 15:48:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=517868" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1949 (9) TMI 25 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200804</link>
      <description>A payment made to secure a proposed cinema lease was treated as advance rent rather than salami or premium, because its true character was a deposit linked to an expected business lease arrangement and not consideration for acquiring a capital asset. On that basis, the amount was regarded as expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose of earning business profits and was deductible in computing business income. The reference was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Sep 1949 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200804</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>