<?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 86 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16464</link>
    <description>Penalty levied for delayed payment of sales tax under section 36(3) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 was held to be penal in character and to contain no compensatory element. Applying the statutory scheme and binding precedent, the Court treated the impost as a true penalty rather than a compensatory levy. As a result, it was not allowable as a deduction under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the issue was answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Dec 2013 14:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=55464" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (12) TMI 86 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16464</link>
      <description>Penalty levied for delayed payment of sales tax under section 36(3) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 was held to be penal in character and to contain no compensatory element. Applying the statutory scheme and binding precedent, the Court treated the impost as a true penalty rather than a compensatory levy. As a result, it was not allowable as a deduction under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the issue was answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16464</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>