<?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>1998 (4) TMI 38 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15158</link>
    <description>The court held that the fee paid for supervision of machinery erection was taxable as it did not form part of the sale price of the machinery. The court also approved the Tribunal&#039;s method of grossing up tax liability on payments to the foreign technician to determine the gross notional income. The judgment favored the assessee, directing parties to bear their respective costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 13:41:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54158" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (4) TMI 38 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15158</link>
      <description>The court held that the fee paid for supervision of machinery erection was taxable as it did not form part of the sale price of the machinery. The court also approved the Tribunal&#039;s method of grossing up tax liability on payments to the foreign technician to determine the gross notional income. The judgment favored the assessee, directing parties to bear their respective costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15158</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>