<?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>1940 (2) TMI 13 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168516</link>
    <description>A co-operative central bank registered under the Co-operative Societies Act was treated as an &quot;association of individuals&quot; under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 because the charging provision extended to corporate bodies with separate legal existence. The mutuality principle was held inapplicable where the bank carried on ordinary banking business with both members and non-members, so its profits were not excluded on that basis. An exemption notification protected the profits of certain co-operative societies from separate tax, but required them to be included in total income for rate purposes. The disputed profit was therefore includible in total income.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Feb 1940 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2015 10:30:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=378371" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1940 (2) TMI 13 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168516</link>
      <description>A co-operative central bank registered under the Co-operative Societies Act was treated as an &quot;association of individuals&quot; under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 because the charging provision extended to corporate bodies with separate legal existence. The mutuality principle was held inapplicable where the bank carried on ordinary banking business with both members and non-members, so its profits were not excluded on that basis. An exemption notification protected the profits of certain co-operative societies from separate tax, but required them to be included in total income for rate purposes. The disputed profit was therefore includible in total income.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Feb 1940 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168516</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>