<?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>1984 (2) TMI 9 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26615</link>
    <description>Deductibility under the Karnataka Agricultural Income-tax Act turned on the nature and purpose of the expenditure proved on record. Consultancy fee was not conclusively decided because the consultancy services were not sufficiently particularised, so the matter was left for reconsideration by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer. The disallowance of general charges was set aside because the assessing authority had already allowed voucher-supported items and the further objection was only a general criticism. Auditor&#039;s fee was also held deductible, as it was paid for examination of accounts and preparation of financial statements. The revision thus succeeded only in part.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 13:18:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=65613" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (2) TMI 9 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26615</link>
      <description>Deductibility under the Karnataka Agricultural Income-tax Act turned on the nature and purpose of the expenditure proved on record. Consultancy fee was not conclusively decided because the consultancy services were not sufficiently particularised, so the matter was left for reconsideration by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer. The disallowance of general charges was set aside because the assessing authority had already allowed voucher-supported items and the further objection was only a general criticism. Auditor&#039;s fee was also held deductible, as it was paid for examination of accounts and preparation of financial statements. The revision thus succeeded only in part.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26615</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>