<?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 (4) TMI 35 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27041</link>
    <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that messing expenses for providing meals to directors and expenses on tea, cold drinks, etc., were legitimate business expenditures and not entertainment expenses under section 37(2B) of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1972-73. The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, distinguishing between entertainment and business expenses, and concluded that most of the expenses were not subject to disallowance under the entertainment expenses provision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 13:43:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=66039" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (4) TMI 35 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27041</link>
      <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that messing expenses for providing meals to directors and expenses on tea, cold drinks, etc., were legitimate business expenditures and not entertainment expenses under section 37(2B) of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1972-73. The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, distinguishing between entertainment and business expenses, and concluded that most of the expenses were not subject to disallowance under the entertainment expenses provision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27041</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>