<?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>2009 (3) TMI 420 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75732</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the deduction of income-tax and wealth-tax liabilities from previous years under section 2(m)(iii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The Supreme Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, stating that even if the tax liability was quantified subsequently, it was deductible as a &#039;debt owed.&#039; Additionally, the Division Bench held that the assessee qualified as an industrial undertaking under section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Act due to engaging in processing goods, entitling them to exemption. Both issues were decided in favor of the assessee based on legal interpretations and precedents, disposing of the reference in their favor.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2013 17:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113988" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (3) TMI 420 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75732</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the deduction of income-tax and wealth-tax liabilities from previous years under section 2(m)(iii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The Supreme Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, stating that even if the tax liability was quantified subsequently, it was deductible as a &#039;debt owed.&#039; Additionally, the Division Bench held that the assessee qualified as an industrial undertaking under section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Act due to engaging in processing goods, entitling them to exemption. Both issues were decided in favor of the assessee based on legal interpretations and precedents, disposing of the reference in their favor.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75732</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>