<?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 (4) TMI 1485 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359374</link>
    <description>The court held that the payment of Rs. 1 Crore for the exclusive use of the trademark &quot;HILTON&quot; is to be treated as revenue expenditure. The court directed that the payment be treated as revenue expenditure for the AY 1996-97, favoring the appellant and against the Revenue. The deduction under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was allowed in favor of the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=518362" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 1485 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359374</link>
      <description>The court held that the payment of Rs. 1 Crore for the exclusive use of the trademark &quot;HILTON&quot; is to be treated as revenue expenditure. The court directed that the payment be treated as revenue expenditure for the AY 1996-97, favoring the appellant and against the Revenue. The deduction under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was allowed in favor of the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359374</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>