<?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>2024 (10) TMI 1289 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760690</link>
    <description>Provision for future expenses under the mercantile system is treated as an allowable deduction for estimated liabilities, and the High Court applied its earlier precedent to answer the substantial questions of law in favour of the assessee. The text also records that the Revenue&#039;s Special Leave Petition was not entertained because there was no reason to condone the delay in filing, and the application for condonation of delay was dismissed, with the SLP dismissed accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 May 2026 12:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=775571" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (10) TMI 1289 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760690</link>
      <description>Provision for future expenses under the mercantile system is treated as an allowable deduction for estimated liabilities, and the High Court applied its earlier precedent to answer the substantial questions of law in favour of the assessee. The text also records that the Revenue&#039;s Special Leave Petition was not entertained because there was no reason to condone the delay in filing, and the application for condonation of delay was dismissed, with the SLP dismissed accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760690</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>