<?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>1951 (5) TMI 6 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169604</link>
    <description>Receipts from the sale of timber obtained by clearing forest land purchased for plantation purposes were treated as taxable business income because the timber was cut and sold in the course of the company&#039;s ordinary commercial operations. The fact that the trees formed part of a wasting or exhausted asset did not convert the proceeds into a capital receipt, since the sale arose from business exploitation of estate land rather than mere realisation of capital. The casual and non-recurring receipt exemption was also inapplicable because the receipt was deliberate, foreseeable, and connected with the company&#039;s business objects. The timber-sale proceeds, including the kuttikanam amount, were therefore liable to income-tax as trade profits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sun, 13 May 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2015 16:45:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=383109" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1951 (5) TMI 6 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169604</link>
      <description>Receipts from the sale of timber obtained by clearing forest land purchased for plantation purposes were treated as taxable business income because the timber was cut and sold in the course of the company&#039;s ordinary commercial operations. The fact that the trees formed part of a wasting or exhausted asset did not convert the proceeds into a capital receipt, since the sale arose from business exploitation of estate land rather than mere realisation of capital. The casual and non-recurring receipt exemption was also inapplicable because the receipt was deliberate, foreseeable, and connected with the company&#039;s business objects. The timber-sale proceeds, including the kuttikanam amount, were therefore liable to income-tax as trade profits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sun, 13 May 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169604</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>