<?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>1996 (12) TMI 94 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57529</link>
    <description>The tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming that the payment received by the assessee was to be treated as salary or additional remuneration, thus subject to taxation. The tribunal found that the payment, despite being characterized as compensation for refraining from competition, effectively constituted additional salary for services rendered to the company. Consequently, the amount was deemed taxable as revenue income in the hands of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Dec 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Dec 2010 16:26:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=95988" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (12) TMI 94 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57529</link>
      <description>The tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming that the payment received by the assessee was to be treated as salary or additional remuneration, thus subject to taxation. The tribunal found that the payment, despite being characterized as compensation for refraining from competition, effectively constituted additional salary for services rendered to the company. Consequently, the amount was deemed taxable as revenue income in the hands of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Dec 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57529</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>