<?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>1988 (4) TMI 96 - ITAT BOMBAY-C</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58787</link>
    <description>Expenditure incurred by firms to send a partner abroad for MBA and management accounting studies was treated as revenue expenditure because it was undertaken under a written business arrangement to improve management and accounting skills and enhance professional services. The contractual commitment for post-study service showed a commercial purpose, and the outlay facilitated business efficiency without creating a capital asset. Any incidental personal benefit to the partner did not change the business character of the expense. The expenditure was therefore allowable as business expenditure, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Dec 2010 11:55:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=97243" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (4) TMI 96 - ITAT BOMBAY-C</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58787</link>
      <description>Expenditure incurred by firms to send a partner abroad for MBA and management accounting studies was treated as revenue expenditure because it was undertaken under a written business arrangement to improve management and accounting skills and enhance professional services. The contractual commitment for post-study service showed a commercial purpose, and the outlay facilitated business efficiency without creating a capital asset. Any incidental personal benefit to the partner did not change the business character of the expense. The expenditure was therefore allowable as business expenditure, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58787</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>