<?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 (1) TMI 76 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21741</link>
    <description>The High Court of Gujarat ruled against the partnership-firm, denying its claim for export markets development allowance under section 35B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for interest paid on packing credit loans. The court held that the interest paid on packing credit loans did not qualify for weighted deduction under section 35B, as it was expenditure incurred in India for the supply of goods outside India, which is specifically excluded under the Act. The court disagreed with the decisions of the lower authorities and concluded that the firm was not entitled to claim the deduction, resulting in the reference being answered in the negative with no order as to costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 13:47:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=60740" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (1) TMI 76 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21741</link>
      <description>The High Court of Gujarat ruled against the partnership-firm, denying its claim for export markets development allowance under section 35B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for interest paid on packing credit loans. The court held that the interest paid on packing credit loans did not qualify for weighted deduction under section 35B, as it was expenditure incurred in India for the supply of goods outside India, which is specifically excluded under the Act. The court disagreed with the decisions of the lower authorities and concluded that the firm was not entitled to claim the deduction, resulting in the reference being answered in the negative with no order as to costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21741</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>