<?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>2009 (5) TMI 28 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33588</link>
    <description>Section 43B requires actual payment of a statutory liability before deduction is allowed, and furnishing a bank guarantee does not amount to such payment because no money is paid to the exchequer. The provision also applies only to compulsory tax-like exactions within the genus of &quot;tax, duty, cess or fee, by whatever name called&quot;, applying ejusdem generis to confine its scope. On that basis, bottling fee payable under the Rajasthan Excise regime, being consideration for the exclusive privilege to bottle IMFL and not a tax or fee of that character, falls outside section 43B. The disallowance was therefore not attracted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2018 16:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72218" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (5) TMI 28 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33588</link>
      <description>Section 43B requires actual payment of a statutory liability before deduction is allowed, and furnishing a bank guarantee does not amount to such payment because no money is paid to the exchequer. The provision also applies only to compulsory tax-like exactions within the genus of &quot;tax, duty, cess or fee, by whatever name called&quot;, applying ejusdem generis to confine its scope. On that basis, bottling fee payable under the Rajasthan Excise regime, being consideration for the exclusive privilege to bottle IMFL and not a tax or fee of that character, falls outside section 43B. The disallowance was therefore not attracted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33588</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>