<?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>1981 (9) TMI 92 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29645</link>
    <description>The High Court held that the write-off of forfeited amounts by the assessee was admissible as a deduction in the computation of taxable business profits. The Court found that the loss incurred was in the course of the assessee&#039;s business and was a revenue loss, not an expenditure. The Tribunal&#039;s decision to allow the deduction was upheld, as the write-off was deemed to be directly related to the business operations and incidental to the business. The Court did not delve into the consideration of the allowance of business loss as a revenue item, as the department did not argue against it. The decision favored the assessee, who was awarded costs, including counsel&#039;s fee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:10:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68642" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (9) TMI 92 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29645</link>
      <description>The High Court held that the write-off of forfeited amounts by the assessee was admissible as a deduction in the computation of taxable business profits. The Court found that the loss incurred was in the course of the assessee&#039;s business and was a revenue loss, not an expenditure. The Tribunal&#039;s decision to allow the deduction was upheld, as the write-off was deemed to be directly related to the business operations and incidental to the business. The Court did not delve into the consideration of the allowance of business loss as a revenue item, as the department did not argue against it. The decision favored the assessee, who was awarded costs, including counsel&#039;s fee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29645</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>