<?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>1992 (12) TMI 28 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20992</link>
    <description>The court determined that the remuneration received by the assessee as a managing director should be classified as &quot;Income from salary&quot; rather than &quot;Income from other sources.&quot; This classification meant that the deductions claimed by the assessee were not permissible under the head of &quot;Income from salary.&quot; As a result, the court ruled in favor of the Revenue, denying the deductions and affirming the classification of the remuneration as salary income.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:10:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=59991" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (12) TMI 28 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20992</link>
      <description>The court determined that the remuneration received by the assessee as a managing director should be classified as &quot;Income from salary&quot; rather than &quot;Income from other sources.&quot; This classification meant that the deductions claimed by the assessee were not permissible under the head of &quot;Income from salary.&quot; As a result, the court ruled in favor of the Revenue, denying the deductions and affirming the classification of the remuneration as salary income.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20992</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>