<?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>1994 (9) TMI 116 - ITAT BOMBAY-D</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58918</link>
    <description>The ITAT Bombay-D held that the liability for power charges payable to the Maharashtra State Electricity Board was ascertained for the assessment year 1990-91 and could be excluded from book profits under section 115J. The tribunal rejected the revenue&#039;s appeal but dismissed certain grounds of the assessee&#039;s appeal concerning liabilities from previous years. The decision was based on a thorough analysis of the evidence and arguments presented by both parties regarding the date of ascertainment of the liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Dec 2010 17:54:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=97373" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (9) TMI 116 - ITAT BOMBAY-D</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58918</link>
      <description>The ITAT Bombay-D held that the liability for power charges payable to the Maharashtra State Electricity Board was ascertained for the assessment year 1990-91 and could be excluded from book profits under section 115J. The tribunal rejected the revenue&#039;s appeal but dismissed certain grounds of the assessee&#039;s appeal concerning liabilities from previous years. The decision was based on a thorough analysis of the evidence and arguments presented by both parties regarding the date of ascertainment of the liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58918</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>