<?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 (12) TMI 66 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16187</link>
    <description>Know-how fees payable under a collaboration agreement accrued when the contractual obligation arose, and a later requirement of Reserve Bank of India permission for remittance did not postpone that accrual or make the liability contingent for income-tax purposes. Under the accounting method regularly employed, income and expenditure must be computed consistently under section 145, and a mixed or piecemeal method cannot be applied to the same source. The foreign exchange restriction affected only the mode of payment, not the existence or enforceability of the liability. On that basis, the expenditure was not allowable in the assessment year in question because the liability had already accrued in an earlier year.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2009 16:32:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=55187" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (12) TMI 66 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16187</link>
      <description>Know-how fees payable under a collaboration agreement accrued when the contractual obligation arose, and a later requirement of Reserve Bank of India permission for remittance did not postpone that accrual or make the liability contingent for income-tax purposes. Under the accounting method regularly employed, income and expenditure must be computed consistently under section 145, and a mixed or piecemeal method cannot be applied to the same source. The foreign exchange restriction affected only the mode of payment, not the existence or enforceability of the liability. On that basis, the expenditure was not allowable in the assessment year in question because the liability had already accrued in an earlier year.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16187</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>