<?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>2017 (9) TMI 1955 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298217</link>
    <description>Expenditure on soil cultivation, planting and shade creation in tea gardens was treated as revenue expenditure because it arose in the ordinary course of plantation activity and there was no evidence of expansion of the plantation area or fresh capital investment; the disallowance was therefore not justified. Employees&#039; contribution to provident fund was held allowable where the remittance was made before the return-filing due date, even though it was deposited after the due date under the provident fund law; the disallowance was accordingly not sustainable. The Revenue&#039;s challenge failed on both issues and the deletion of additions was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2021 08:15:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=659037" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 1955 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298217</link>
      <description>Expenditure on soil cultivation, planting and shade creation in tea gardens was treated as revenue expenditure because it arose in the ordinary course of plantation activity and there was no evidence of expansion of the plantation area or fresh capital investment; the disallowance was therefore not justified. Employees&#039; contribution to provident fund was held allowable where the remittance was made before the return-filing due date, even though it was deposited after the due date under the provident fund law; the disallowance was accordingly not sustainable. The Revenue&#039;s challenge failed on both issues and the deletion of additions was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298217</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>