<?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>1986 (3) TMI 13 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25902</link>
    <description>Under the Maharashtra Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1962, deductions under section 8, including the residuary allowance in section 8(9), were confined to expenditure actually incurred in the relevant previous year. Licence fee, Government share of profit and interest payments made after the close of the previous year ending 31 March 1964 were therefore not deductible. The argument based on real income and diversion of income at source failed because the agreement created only a liability to pay and did not impose any charge on income or diversion before accrual. The earlier authority cited was distinguished because there the payments had been made within the relevant year.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:50:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=64900" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (3) TMI 13 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25902</link>
      <description>Under the Maharashtra Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1962, deductions under section 8, including the residuary allowance in section 8(9), were confined to expenditure actually incurred in the relevant previous year. Licence fee, Government share of profit and interest payments made after the close of the previous year ending 31 March 1964 were therefore not deductible. The argument based on real income and diversion of income at source failed because the agreement created only a liability to pay and did not impose any charge on income or diversion before accrual. The earlier authority cited was distinguished because there the payments had been made within the relevant year.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25902</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>