<?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 (5) TMI 443 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359879</link>
    <description>The court ruled in favor of the applicant assessee regarding the exclusion of excise duty from total turnover for Section 80HHC deduction. However, the court favored the respondent Revenue in determining that the expenditure on technical know-how falls under Section 35AB rather than Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court cited relevant precedents and interpretations to support its decision. The case was disposed of with no order as to costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 May 2018 08:43:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=519248" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 443 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359879</link>
      <description>The court ruled in favor of the applicant assessee regarding the exclusion of excise duty from total turnover for Section 80HHC deduction. However, the court favored the respondent Revenue in determining that the expenditure on technical know-how falls under Section 35AB rather than Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court cited relevant precedents and interpretations to support its decision. The case was disposed of with no order as to costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359879</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>