<?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>1937 (3) TMI 13 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168519</link>
    <description>A pending dispute over title does not bar assessment of a person as owner for property income tax where the assessee has consistently claimed ownership and the Department is entitled to determine ownership for assessment purposes without waiting for the civil suit. The court-ordered arrangement for joint collection of rent by co-owners did not make them receivers or managers appointed by or under an order of court within the relevant provision, and that machinery provision did not exclude direct assessment of the real owners. On the stated reasoning, the income was received and enjoyed by the co-owners themselves, so assessment on the assessee&#039;s share of property income was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 1937 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2015 11:16:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=378379" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1937 (3) TMI 13 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168519</link>
      <description>A pending dispute over title does not bar assessment of a person as owner for property income tax where the assessee has consistently claimed ownership and the Department is entitled to determine ownership for assessment purposes without waiting for the civil suit. The court-ordered arrangement for joint collection of rent by co-owners did not make them receivers or managers appointed by or under an order of court within the relevant provision, and that machinery provision did not exclude direct assessment of the real owners. On the stated reasoning, the income was received and enjoyed by the co-owners themselves, so assessment on the assessee&#039;s share of property income was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 1937 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168519</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>