<?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>2000 (2) TMI 33 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14259</link>
    <description>Kist payable under the excise arrangement was treated as consideration for obtaining the exclusive right to vend liquor, not as excise duty or tax. On that construction of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 and the relevant notifications, it was held that the amount was not a statutory impost covered by section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and therefore no disallowance under that provision arose. The reference was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 17:44:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=53259" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (2) TMI 33 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14259</link>
      <description>Kist payable under the excise arrangement was treated as consideration for obtaining the exclusive right to vend liquor, not as excise duty or tax. On that construction of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 and the relevant notifications, it was held that the amount was not a statutory impost covered by section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and therefore no disallowance under that provision arose. The reference was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14259</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>