<?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>1982 (3) TMI 98 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57588</link>
    <description>Customary bonus paid to employees on Diwali every year was treated as a customary, not statutory, bonus, so the ceiling in the proviso to section 36(1)(ii) did not apply. The distinction drawn between bonus under the bonus legislation and puja or other customary bonus meant the payment was allowable as business expenditure. The disallowance was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Dec 2010 19:02:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=96047" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (3) TMI 98 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57588</link>
      <description>Customary bonus paid to employees on Diwali every year was treated as a customary, not statutory, bonus, so the ceiling in the proviso to section 36(1)(ii) did not apply. The distinction drawn between bonus under the bonus legislation and puja or other customary bonus meant the payment was allowable as business expenditure. The disallowance was therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57588</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>