<?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 45 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16836</link>
    <description>Under an amalgamation scheme that continued the transferor&#039;s business and employee obligations from the transfer date, payments for bonus, sales tax arrears and estate valuation fee were treated as items attributable to the ongoing business and not as part of the consideration for acquiring assets. Because the expenditure was not shown to have been incurred to bring any asset into existence, it was held to be revenue in nature and allowable as deductions in computing agricultural income. The ruling therefore distinguished business liabilities and employee-related obligations from capital expenditure merely because they arose in the course of amalgamation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Sep 2009 15:22:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=55836" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (3) TMI 45 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16836</link>
      <description>Under an amalgamation scheme that continued the transferor&#039;s business and employee obligations from the transfer date, payments for bonus, sales tax arrears and estate valuation fee were treated as items attributable to the ongoing business and not as part of the consideration for acquiring assets. Because the expenditure was not shown to have been incurred to bring any asset into existence, it was held to be revenue in nature and allowable as deductions in computing agricultural income. The ruling therefore distinguished business liabilities and employee-related obligations from capital expenditure merely because they arose in the course of amalgamation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16836</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>