<?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>1996 (3) TMI 89 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18116</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that the expenditure incurred by the assessee for constructing roads, wells, and pipelines was revenue expenditure and incurred wholly and exclusively for the business purpose. The court ruled in favor of the assessee, rejecting the Revenue&#039;s argument that the expenditure should be treated as capital expenditure.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Sep 2009 18:09:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=57116" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (3) TMI 89 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18116</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that the expenditure incurred by the assessee for constructing roads, wells, and pipelines was revenue expenditure and incurred wholly and exclusively for the business purpose. The court ruled in favor of the assessee, rejecting the Revenue&#039;s argument that the expenditure should be treated as capital expenditure.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18116</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>