<?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>1983 (9) TMI 2 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20566</link>
    <description>Remuneration paid to a managing director and director was not subject to disallowance under the applicable remuneration-limitation provision, as an earlier decision on similar facts in the assessee&#039;s own matter governed the issue. Interest paid for defaults or delays under the advance-tax and tax-demand interest provisions was not deductible, also because prior precedent in the same matter controlled the question. The reference therefore granted relief on the remuneration disallowance while denying deduction for the interest payments. The governing principle was consistent application of binding precedent where materially identical questions arise.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Nov 2009 17:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=59565" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (9) TMI 2 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20566</link>
      <description>Remuneration paid to a managing director and director was not subject to disallowance under the applicable remuneration-limitation provision, as an earlier decision on similar facts in the assessee&#039;s own matter governed the issue. Interest paid for defaults or delays under the advance-tax and tax-demand interest provisions was not deductible, also because prior precedent in the same matter controlled the question. The reference therefore granted relief on the remuneration disallowance while denying deduction for the interest payments. The governing principle was consistent application of binding precedent where materially identical questions arise.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20566</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>