<?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>1979 (10) TMI 61 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36929</link>
    <description>Statutory interest under the U.P. Sugarcane (Purchase Tax) Act and damages for delayed provident fund payment were held not deductible as business expenditure under the Income-tax Act, following earlier binding precedent; the claim failed. By contrast, guarantee commission paid to directors for standing surety on a bank loan was treated as commercially incurred for the business and within the permissible statutory limit, so the deduction was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2010 14:15:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=75475" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (10) TMI 61 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36929</link>
      <description>Statutory interest under the U.P. Sugarcane (Purchase Tax) Act and damages for delayed provident fund payment were held not deductible as business expenditure under the Income-tax Act, following earlier binding precedent; the claim failed. By contrast, guarantee commission paid to directors for standing surety on a bank loan was treated as commercially incurred for the business and within the permissible statutory limit, so the deduction was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36929</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>