<?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 (7) TMI 47 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13035</link>
    <description>Surtax liability was treated as not deductible in computing taxable income, following earlier High Court precedent. The claimed amount set aside as bonus under section 15(1) of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 was also held not allowable as business expenditure, relying on decisions of the Madhya Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh High Courts. The operative result is that neither item could be claimed as a deduction, and both issues were answered against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 10:38:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=52045" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (7) TMI 47 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13035</link>
      <description>Surtax liability was treated as not deductible in computing taxable income, following earlier High Court precedent. The claimed amount set aside as bonus under section 15(1) of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 was also held not allowable as business expenditure, relying on decisions of the Madhya Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh High Courts. The operative result is that neither item could be claimed as a deduction, and both issues were answered against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13035</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>