<?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>1991 (2) TMI 79 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22481</link>
    <description>A retainer fee paid to legal counsel for general legal and tax advice was treated as composite business expenditure, deductible under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Because the payment was not shown to be item-wise attributable only to proceedings covered by section 80VV, it could not be apportioned and partly brought within that restrictive ceiling. The genuineness of the payment was not disputed, and the court held that a retainer fee for services kept available to the assessee cannot be split up to deny the deduction otherwise available under section 37. The proposed apportionment under section 80VV was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 13:17:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=61480" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (2) TMI 79 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22481</link>
      <description>A retainer fee paid to legal counsel for general legal and tax advice was treated as composite business expenditure, deductible under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Because the payment was not shown to be item-wise attributable only to proceedings covered by section 80VV, it could not be apportioned and partly brought within that restrictive ceiling. The genuineness of the payment was not disputed, and the court held that a retainer fee for services kept available to the assessee cannot be split up to deny the deduction otherwise available under section 37. The proposed apportionment under section 80VV was therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22481</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>