<?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>2006 (11) TMI 179 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13694</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to allow deduction for embezzled funds as trading loss for the assessment year 1985-86. Relying on precedents and the Income-tax Act, the Court found a direct connection between the embezzlement and the assessee&#039;s business operations, thus affirming the deductibility of the claimed amount. The Court ruled in favor of the assessee, emphasizing that losses incidental to business operations should be deductible under section 37 of the Income-tax Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:36:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=52702" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (11) TMI 179 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13694</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to allow deduction for embezzled funds as trading loss for the assessment year 1985-86. Relying on precedents and the Income-tax Act, the Court found a direct connection between the embezzlement and the assessee&#039;s business operations, thus affirming the deductibility of the claimed amount. The Court ruled in favor of the assessee, emphasizing that losses incidental to business operations should be deductible under section 37 of the Income-tax Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13694</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>