<?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>2001 (8) TMI 32 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12857</link>
    <description>Interest liability arising under the Income-tax Act was held not to be deductible in computing business profits, because the point was already settled by binding Supreme Court precedent. Surtax liability was also held not to be an allowable deduction in computing total income, again following the Supreme Court&#039;s earlier ruling. Both referred questions were answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue, and the reference was disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 15:45:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=51868" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (8) TMI 32 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12857</link>
      <description>Interest liability arising under the Income-tax Act was held not to be deductible in computing business profits, because the point was already settled by binding Supreme Court precedent. Surtax liability was also held not to be an allowable deduction in computing total income, again following the Supreme Court&#039;s earlier ruling. Both referred questions were answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue, and the reference was disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12857</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>