<?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>2021 (1) TMI 841 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403249</link>
    <description>The Court set aside previous decisions and remitted the matter for fresh consideration to determine the reasonableness of remuneration paid to the Managing Director under Section 40A(2) of the Income Tax Act. The burden of proof lies on the assessee to demonstrate the business purpose of the expenditure, emphasizing the need for proper assessment and evidence of the Director&#039;s contribution to global orders.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2021 15:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=633683" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (1) TMI 841 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403249</link>
      <description>The Court set aside previous decisions and remitted the matter for fresh consideration to determine the reasonableness of remuneration paid to the Managing Director under Section 40A(2) of the Income Tax Act. The burden of proof lies on the assessee to demonstrate the business purpose of the expenditure, emphasizing the need for proper assessment and evidence of the Director&#039;s contribution to global orders.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403249</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>