<?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>1978 (12) TMI 93 - ITAT MADRAS-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69253</link>
    <description>For estate duty purposes, gifted property is deemed to pass on the donor&#039;s death under section 10 unless the donee has assumed and retained bona fide possession and enjoyment to the complete exclusion of the donor; continued cultivation by the donor as lessee and retention of rental income showed that test was not met. The Tribunal also upheld full valuation of the gifted lands, disallowed the claimed abatements under sections 46(1) and 46(2), treated a Rs. 5,000 payment as normal expenditure outside section 9(1), and deleted aggregation of the lineal descendant&#039;s share under section 34(1)(c) in light of the constitutional ruling against such aggregation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Dec 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 17:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=107623" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (12) TMI 93 - ITAT MADRAS-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69253</link>
      <description>For estate duty purposes, gifted property is deemed to pass on the donor&#039;s death under section 10 unless the donee has assumed and retained bona fide possession and enjoyment to the complete exclusion of the donor; continued cultivation by the donor as lessee and retention of rental income showed that test was not met. The Tribunal also upheld full valuation of the gifted lands, disallowed the claimed abatements under sections 46(1) and 46(2), treated a Rs. 5,000 payment as normal expenditure outside section 9(1), and deleted aggregation of the lineal descendant&#039;s share under section 34(1)(c) in light of the constitutional ruling against such aggregation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Dec 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69253</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>