<?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 73 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17518</link>
    <description>The court upheld the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision that payments made by the assessee-company to its holding company for director services fell within the scope of section 40(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court distinguished previous Supreme Court decisions cited by the assessee, emphasizing that the payments were for services rendered and not for valuable rights. The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, affirming the applicability of section 40(c) to the payments, and declined to address additional controversies raised by the assessee. The judgment concluded without costs, settling the interpretation and application of section 40(c) in this case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:52:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=56518" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (3) TMI 73 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17518</link>
      <description>The court upheld the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision that payments made by the assessee-company to its holding company for director services fell within the scope of section 40(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court distinguished previous Supreme Court decisions cited by the assessee, emphasizing that the payments were for services rendered and not for valuable rights. The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, affirming the applicability of section 40(c) to the payments, and declined to address additional controversies raised by the assessee. The judgment concluded without costs, settling the interpretation and application of section 40(c) in this case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17518</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>