<?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 (10) TMI 76 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21294</link>
    <description>HC held that commission paid to a bank for furnishing a guarantee to secure payment of income tax is analogous to interest on delayed tax and is not deductible u/s 37. Expenditure on long-overdue repairs and renovation of the administrative block was not &quot;current repairs&quot; u/s 30(a)(ii), being capital in nature, though depreciation was directed to be allowed if otherwise admissible. Enhanced liability on imported machinery due to exchange fluctuation could not be added to &quot;actual cost&quot; for computing development rebate. However, modest expenditure incurred on business guests was held not to be &quot;entertainment expenditure,&quot; and was allowable in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2025 19:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=60293" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (10) TMI 76 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21294</link>
      <description>HC held that commission paid to a bank for furnishing a guarantee to secure payment of income tax is analogous to interest on delayed tax and is not deductible u/s 37. Expenditure on long-overdue repairs and renovation of the administrative block was not &quot;current repairs&quot; u/s 30(a)(ii), being capital in nature, though depreciation was directed to be allowed if otherwise admissible. Enhanced liability on imported machinery due to exchange fluctuation could not be added to &quot;actual cost&quot; for computing development rebate. However, modest expenditure incurred on business guests was held not to be &quot;entertainment expenditure,&quot; and was allowable in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21294</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>