<?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 (2) TMI 88 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21040</link>
    <description>Weighted deduction under section 35B(1)(b)(viii) applied to expenditure on services performed outside India in connection with export contracts, so sea freight and marine insurance qualified because they were treated as services directly linked to execution of the export contracts. The exclusion in another sub-clause could not be imported into clause (viii). Railway freight for inland carriage from the manufacturing centre to the port did not qualify because it was not expenditure on services performed outside India, even though it was connected with the export contract. The result was allowance for marine insurance and sea freight, but not for railway freight.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:23:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=60039" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (2) TMI 88 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21040</link>
      <description>Weighted deduction under section 35B(1)(b)(viii) applied to expenditure on services performed outside India in connection with export contracts, so sea freight and marine insurance qualified because they were treated as services directly linked to execution of the export contracts. The exclusion in another sub-clause could not be imported into clause (viii). Railway freight for inland carriage from the manufacturing centre to the port did not qualify because it was not expenditure on services performed outside India, even though it was connected with the export contract. The result was allowance for marine insurance and sea freight, but not for railway freight.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21040</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>