<?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>1987 (11) TMI 66 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25095</link>
    <description>Bonus paid above the statutory minimum for the pre-takeover period was capital expenditure where the liability had been treated as part of the consideration for acquiring the business. The payment was incurred to obtain the business itself, not in the course of carrying it on for profit, so it retained the character of acquisition cost rather than a revenue outgoing. Accordingly, the excess bonus relating to the period before takeover was not allowable as a revenue deduction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:08:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=64093" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (11) TMI 66 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25095</link>
      <description>Bonus paid above the statutory minimum for the pre-takeover period was capital expenditure where the liability had been treated as part of the consideration for acquiring the business. The payment was incurred to obtain the business itself, not in the course of carrying it on for profit, so it retained the character of acquisition cost rather than a revenue outgoing. Accordingly, the excess bonus relating to the period before takeover was not allowable as a revenue deduction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25095</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>