<?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>1992 (8) TMI 114 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60768</link>
    <description>Income from property incidental to a tea business was treated as business income, with normal depreciation allowed and the disclosed annual rental value accepted. Small contributions to committees and charitable, social and philanthropic bodies were treated as business expenditure on consistency with earlier orders. Payments for employee welfare hospitals fell within the statutory-obligation exception to the bar on trusts and funds, because they were made to satisfy plantation labour law requirements. Extra shift allowance on buildings and investment allowance on jeeps and motor cycles were also allowed on the same factual basis. Unilateral write-back of liabilities did not by itself establish cessation of liability, so section 41(1) was not attracted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011 19:04:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=99215" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (8) TMI 114 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60768</link>
      <description>Income from property incidental to a tea business was treated as business income, with normal depreciation allowed and the disclosed annual rental value accepted. Small contributions to committees and charitable, social and philanthropic bodies were treated as business expenditure on consistency with earlier orders. Payments for employee welfare hospitals fell within the statutory-obligation exception to the bar on trusts and funds, because they were made to satisfy plantation labour law requirements. Extra shift allowance on buildings and investment allowance on jeeps and motor cycles were also allowed on the same factual basis. Unilateral write-back of liabilities did not by itself establish cessation of liability, so section 41(1) was not attracted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60768</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>