<?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>1969 (2) TMI 84 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98591</link>
    <description>Distribution of a company&#039;s assets by a voluntary liquidator to contributories on winding up was analysed as a statutory adjustment of pre-existing rights, not a conveyance by an owner. On that reasoning, the transaction did not amount to a sale, exchange, relinquishment or transfer within section 12B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, because no new title was created and no beneficial ownership was divested in the relevant sense. Section 12B(3) was read as supporting tax only on a subsequent alienation by the recipient, and taxing the initial distribution would risk double taxation. The distribution was therefore treated as outside capital gains tax under section 12B.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Jan 2012 12:32:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=135648" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1969 (2) TMI 84 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98591</link>
      <description>Distribution of a company&#039;s assets by a voluntary liquidator to contributories on winding up was analysed as a statutory adjustment of pre-existing rights, not a conveyance by an owner. On that reasoning, the transaction did not amount to a sale, exchange, relinquishment or transfer within section 12B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, because no new title was created and no beneficial ownership was divested in the relevant sense. Section 12B(3) was read as supporting tax only on a subsequent alienation by the recipient, and taxing the initial distribution would risk double taxation. The distribution was therefore treated as outside capital gains tax under section 12B.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98591</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>