<?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>1958 (3) TMI 67 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176245</link>
    <description>Receipts of a mutual association are outside tax where contributors and participators are the same in substance and the fund is held for common benefit; on that basis, lagas were treated as non-taxable under the mutuality principle. By contrast, nominees&#039; commission arose from a definite arrangement for services, was neither fortuitous nor non-recurring, and did not qualify as a special allowance or perquisite without an office of profit or a statutory expense-related grant; it was therefore taxable. A separate challenge to entrance fee and annual subscription could not be pursued outside the statutory reference procedure, so the motion was not entertainable in the manner adopted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2015 17:10:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=409456" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1958 (3) TMI 67 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176245</link>
      <description>Receipts of a mutual association are outside tax where contributors and participators are the same in substance and the fund is held for common benefit; on that basis, lagas were treated as non-taxable under the mutuality principle. By contrast, nominees&#039; commission arose from a definite arrangement for services, was neither fortuitous nor non-recurring, and did not qualify as a special allowance or perquisite without an office of profit or a statutory expense-related grant; it was therefore taxable. A separate challenge to entrance fee and annual subscription could not be pursued outside the statutory reference procedure, so the motion was not entertainable in the manner adopted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176245</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>