<?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>1985 (10) TMI 60 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26421</link>
    <description>The High Court held that the payment made by the assessee was speculative in nature under section 43(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court disagreed with the Tribunal&#039;s decision, ruling in favor of the Department. Emphasizing the importance of evidence and legal interpretation, the Court concluded that the payment constituted speculative loss, not allowable as a trading liability. The High Court&#039;s decision supported the Department&#039;s position, answering both questions in the negative.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Oct 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 18:28:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=65419" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (10) TMI 60 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26421</link>
      <description>The High Court held that the payment made by the assessee was speculative in nature under section 43(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court disagreed with the Tribunal&#039;s decision, ruling in favor of the Department. Emphasizing the importance of evidence and legal interpretation, the Court concluded that the payment constituted speculative loss, not allowable as a trading liability. The High Court&#039;s decision supported the Department&#039;s position, answering both questions in the negative.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Oct 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26421</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>