<?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>1961 (7) TMI 74 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175023</link>
    <description>An isolated purchase and resale of agricultural land was not treated as an adventure in the nature of trade because the department failed to prove an intention to trade at the time of acquisition; mere low yield, potential value, prior speculation in other assets, and later resale at a profit were insufficient. By contrast, unexplained bank deposits were sustained as income from undisclosed sources where the assessee&#039;s explanation based on accumulated agricultural income was not credible and the evidence did not support the claimed level of disclosed income. The assessment was therefore only partly disturbed, with the land-sale profit excluded from business taxation but the cash deposit addition maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jul 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2015 13:18:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=404065" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1961 (7) TMI 74 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175023</link>
      <description>An isolated purchase and resale of agricultural land was not treated as an adventure in the nature of trade because the department failed to prove an intention to trade at the time of acquisition; mere low yield, potential value, prior speculation in other assets, and later resale at a profit were insufficient. By contrast, unexplained bank deposits were sustained as income from undisclosed sources where the assessee&#039;s explanation based on accumulated agricultural income was not credible and the evidence did not support the claimed level of disclosed income. The assessment was therefore only partly disturbed, with the land-sale profit excluded from business taxation but the cash deposit addition maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jul 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175023</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>