<?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 (6) TMI 49 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23999</link>
    <description>After insertion of section 40A of the Income-tax Act, deduction for gratuity premium paid to LIC cannot be allowed on general principles under any other provision. An assessee seeking such relief must satisfy the conditions specifically laid down in section 40A. On that reasoning, deduction under section 36(1)(v) was held unavailable on the facts stated, and the claim was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jun 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:14:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=62997" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (6) TMI 49 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23999</link>
      <description>After insertion of section 40A of the Income-tax Act, deduction for gratuity premium paid to LIC cannot be allowed on general principles under any other provision. An assessee seeking such relief must satisfy the conditions specifically laid down in section 40A. On that reasoning, deduction under section 36(1)(v) was held unavailable on the facts stated, and the claim was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jun 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23999</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>