<?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>1988 (9) TMI 38 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24566</link>
    <description>The court held that the disallowance of expenditure incurred by an assessee-company in respect of its employee-directors falls under section 40(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, not section 40A(5). The court emphasized that directors who are also employees are governed by section 40(c), while employees are covered by different provisions. The judgment provides clarity on the distinction between directors and employees in terms of expenditure disallowance, offering guidance on the relevant sections for such situations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2010 09:55:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=63564" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (9) TMI 38 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24566</link>
      <description>The court held that the disallowance of expenditure incurred by an assessee-company in respect of its employee-directors falls under section 40(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, not section 40A(5). The court emphasized that directors who are also employees are governed by section 40(c), while employees are covered by different provisions. The judgment provides clarity on the distinction between directors and employees in terms of expenditure disallowance, offering guidance on the relevant sections for such situations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24566</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>