<?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>1989 (11) TMI 17 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23039</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision that the oil mill was not a separate business but a branch of the assessee&#039;s main business. Consequently, retrenchment compensation was allowed as a deduction under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, as it was incurred for the business&#039;s benefit. The Court emphasized unity of control and interlacing of funds in its decision, favoring the assessee and affirming the Tribunal&#039;s findings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:23:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=62038" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (11) TMI 17 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23039</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision that the oil mill was not a separate business but a branch of the assessee&#039;s main business. Consequently, retrenchment compensation was allowed as a deduction under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, as it was incurred for the business&#039;s benefit. The Court emphasized unity of control and interlacing of funds in its decision, favoring the assessee and affirming the Tribunal&#039;s findings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23039</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>