<?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 (5) TMI 30 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13951</link>
    <description>Penalty paid in lieu of confiscation for importing goods without authorisation was held not to form part of the actual cost of the goods. The payment arose from the assessee&#039;s own breach of customs law and was therefore neither a purchase-cost component nor expenditure wholly and exclusively laid out for business purposes. It was consequently not deductible in computing business profits, and the issue was decided against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 12:31:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=52951" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (5) TMI 30 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13951</link>
      <description>Penalty paid in lieu of confiscation for importing goods without authorisation was held not to form part of the actual cost of the goods. The payment arose from the assessee&#039;s own breach of customs law and was therefore neither a purchase-cost component nor expenditure wholly and exclusively laid out for business purposes. It was consequently not deductible in computing business profits, and the issue was decided against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13951</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>