<?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>2006 (3) TMI 559 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118435</link>
    <description>Amendment of a company&#039;s Articles of Association allowing shareholders to use premises was treated as lawful where it remained within the Companies Act framework and was not shown to be an illegal tax-avoidance arrangement. The notes describe the application of deemed ownership under section 27(iii)(b), under which shareholders using premises through the company may be regarded as owners to the extent of their interests. They further state that a consistent project-completion accounting method could not justify estimated construction-profit income merely because the company changed its arrangement for members&#039; use of the property. On that basis, no income arose from granting members rights to use the premises, and the estimated addition was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Jun 2012 16:12:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155432" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 559 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118435</link>
      <description>Amendment of a company&#039;s Articles of Association allowing shareholders to use premises was treated as lawful where it remained within the Companies Act framework and was not shown to be an illegal tax-avoidance arrangement. The notes describe the application of deemed ownership under section 27(iii)(b), under which shareholders using premises through the company may be regarded as owners to the extent of their interests. They further state that a consistent project-completion accounting method could not justify estimated construction-profit income merely because the company changed its arrangement for members&#039; use of the property. On that basis, no income arose from granting members rights to use the premises, and the estimated addition was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118435</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>