<?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>2007 (8) TMI 18 - HIGH COURT, GAUHATI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1782</link>
    <description>A share transaction settled without actual delivery, with only the difference between purchase and sale prices paid, was treated as a speculative transaction under section 43(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The absence of material disputing the genuineness of the shares did not change the legal character of the contract, because the ining test was settlement otherwise than by actual delivery. The resulting loss was therefore a speculation loss and was not allowable as a deduction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Aug 2008 17:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=41168" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (8) TMI 18 - HIGH COURT, GAUHATI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1782</link>
      <description>A share transaction settled without actual delivery, with only the difference between purchase and sale prices paid, was treated as a speculative transaction under section 43(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The absence of material disputing the genuineness of the shares did not change the legal character of the contract, because the ining test was settlement otherwise than by actual delivery. The resulting loss was therefore a speculation loss and was not allowable as a deduction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1782</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>