<?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>1999 (9) TMI 50 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15465</link>
    <description>Issue 1: The High Court held that interest on sticky loans should not be taxed on an accrual basis, aligning with previous case law. The first question was answered in favor of the assessee.Issue 2: The High Court ruled that conveyance allowance paid to employees should be considered an expenditure for running and maintaining a motor vehicle, falling within the scope of disallowance under section 37(3A) of the Income-tax Act. The second question was answered in favor of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2009 17:13:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54465" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (9) TMI 50 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15465</link>
      <description>Issue 1: The High Court held that interest on sticky loans should not be taxed on an accrual basis, aligning with previous case law. The first question was answered in favor of the assessee.Issue 2: The High Court ruled that conveyance allowance paid to employees should be considered an expenditure for running and maintaining a motor vehicle, falling within the scope of disallowance under section 37(3A) of the Income-tax Act. The second question was answered in favor of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15465</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>