<?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>1938 (3) TMI 16 - HOUSE OF LORDS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173391</link>
    <description>Interest on the specified securities was treated as exempt under the relevant Income Tax Act provisions and connected rules, including War Loan and India Government Stock, with the disputed exemptions extended to the credit items in question. The court also held that no proportionate disallowance of borrowing and related expenses was required merely because the corresponding receipts were exempt, since the expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for the trade and no statutory provision justified a matching reduction. The assessment was therefore reduced for the exempt income, but the expense deduction was maintained, so the appeal failed overall.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 1938 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2015 09:55:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=397262" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1938 (3) TMI 16 - HOUSE OF LORDS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173391</link>
      <description>Interest on the specified securities was treated as exempt under the relevant Income Tax Act provisions and connected rules, including War Loan and India Government Stock, with the disputed exemptions extended to the credit items in question. The court also held that no proportionate disallowance of borrowing and related expenses was required merely because the corresponding receipts were exempt, since the expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for the trade and no statutory provision justified a matching reduction. The assessment was therefore reduced for the exempt income, but the expense deduction was maintained, so the appeal failed overall.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 1938 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173391</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>