<?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>1997 (3) TMI 18 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15898</link>
    <description>Commission expenditure was assessed on the facts of each year, and the Tribunal&#039;s estimate was upheld because no change in circumstances was shown to warrant interference. The Court accepted that the allowable commission deduction depended on year-specific factual findings and declined to disturb the factual conclusion that a disallowance of Rs. 40,000 was reasonable. The question was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Department.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Aug 2009 17:04:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54898" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (3) TMI 18 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15898</link>
      <description>Commission expenditure was assessed on the facts of each year, and the Tribunal&#039;s estimate was upheld because no change in circumstances was shown to warrant interference. The Court accepted that the allowable commission deduction depended on year-specific factual findings and declined to disturb the factual conclusion that a disallowance of Rs. 40,000 was reasonable. The question was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Department.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15898</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>