<?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>1980 (4) TMI 21 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35780</link>
    <description>Commission paid to guarantors for deferred payment of plant and machinery, and interest on those deferred payments, were treated as revenue expenditure because they were incurred in connection with an existing business and finance used to facilitate the commercial undertaking. Applying the test whether the outgoing formed an integral part of the profit-earning process or brought into existence a permanent asset or advantage, the court found that the payments secured the use of money and enabled deferred payment, rather than acquiring a capital asset in themselves. The expenditure was therefore allowable as a deduction, and the reference was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:57:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=74326" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (4) TMI 21 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35780</link>
      <description>Commission paid to guarantors for deferred payment of plant and machinery, and interest on those deferred payments, were treated as revenue expenditure because they were incurred in connection with an existing business and finance used to facilitate the commercial undertaking. Applying the test whether the outgoing formed an integral part of the profit-earning process or brought into existence a permanent asset or advantage, the court found that the payments secured the use of money and enabled deferred payment, rather than acquiring a capital asset in themselves. The expenditure was therefore allowable as a deduction, and the reference was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35780</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>