<?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>1993 (9) TMI 13 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18837</link>
    <description>Weighted deduction under section 35B was denied for assortment charges because the assessee produced no material showing that the expenditure fell within clauses (ii) or (viii) of section 35B(1)(b). The Court also found no evidence that the payments were in the nature of commission. As the statutory requirements were not satisfied on the record, the claim for weighted deduction failed and the Revenue&#039;s view was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Sep 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 12:46:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=57836" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (9) TMI 13 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18837</link>
      <description>Weighted deduction under section 35B was denied for assortment charges because the assessee produced no material showing that the expenditure fell within clauses (ii) or (viii) of section 35B(1)(b). The Court also found no evidence that the payments were in the nature of commission. As the statutory requirements were not satisfied on the record, the claim for weighted deduction failed and the Revenue&#039;s view was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Sep 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18837</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>