<?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 (7) TMI 42 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23779</link>
    <description>A Tribunal&#039;s finding that an assessee was carrying on business during the relevant year was treated as a factual conclusion, not a referable question of law. Because the existence of business activity had already been determined on the facts, no question of law arose for reference on that point. The claim that the related expenditure was allowable as business expenditure also did not survive as an independent legal issue, since it depended on the same factual finding. The request to direct a reference was therefore rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jul 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:57:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=62777" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (7) TMI 42 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23779</link>
      <description>A Tribunal&#039;s finding that an assessee was carrying on business during the relevant year was treated as a factual conclusion, not a referable question of law. Because the existence of business activity had already been determined on the facts, no question of law arose for reference on that point. The claim that the related expenditure was allowable as business expenditure also did not survive as an independent legal issue, since it depended on the same factual finding. The request to direct a reference was therefore rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jul 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23779</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>