<?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>1958 (5) TMI 43 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168401</link>
    <description>Advances under a charter-party for vessel disbursements were treated as pre-payments of hire rather than independent loans, because the sums were to be adjusted against hire and were in substance part of the freight arrangement. For tax deduction at source, section 18(3B) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 applied to sums payable to a non-resident if they were chargeable receipts under the Act, even where final assessment could depend on later adjustments. The charter-party deductions were therefore within the deduction machinery. Discretionary certiorari was also refused because a parallel statutory appeal was pending and had not been candidly disclosed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 May 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2015 14:44:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=377046" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1958 (5) TMI 43 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168401</link>
      <description>Advances under a charter-party for vessel disbursements were treated as pre-payments of hire rather than independent loans, because the sums were to be adjusted against hire and were in substance part of the freight arrangement. For tax deduction at source, section 18(3B) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 applied to sums payable to a non-resident if they were chargeable receipts under the Act, even where final assessment could depend on later adjustments. The charter-party deductions were therefore within the deduction machinery. Discretionary certiorari was also refused because a parallel statutory appeal was pending and had not been candidly disclosed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 May 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168401</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>