<?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 (4) TMI 38 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25398</link>
    <description>The court held that technical fees received by the assessee, profits from asset sales, and miscellaneous receipts were all attributable to the priority industry, qualifying for deduction under section 80-I of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1969-70. The court affirmed the decisions of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal, emphasizing that the technical fees were indeed profits related to the priority industry. The judgment also considered the profit from asset sales and miscellaneous receipts as part of business income attributable to the priority industry, aligning with precedent and Supreme Court decisions. No costs were awarded to either party.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 13:18:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=64396" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (4) TMI 38 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25398</link>
      <description>The court held that technical fees received by the assessee, profits from asset sales, and miscellaneous receipts were all attributable to the priority industry, qualifying for deduction under section 80-I of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1969-70. The court affirmed the decisions of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal, emphasizing that the technical fees were indeed profits related to the priority industry. The judgment also considered the profit from asset sales and miscellaneous receipts as part of business income attributable to the priority industry, aligning with precedent and Supreme Court decisions. No costs were awarded to either party.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25398</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>