<?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>1939 (12) TMI 2 - RANGOON HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178735</link>
    <description>Partnership firms lack separate legal personality from their partners for income-tax purposes and cannot be assessed as distinct entities. Legal expenses incurred to defend partners and a manager against criminal charges were not deductible because the expenditure served personal objectives, including acquittal and protection of reputation, rather than being incurred solely to earn profits. The same expenditure also did not constitute a business loss: voluntary defence costs that achieved their purpose and did not interrupt business operations were not losses in the ordinary commercial sense. The claimed expenses were therefore not allowable either as business expenditure or as a trading loss.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Dec 1939 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2016 17:04:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=416192" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1939 (12) TMI 2 - RANGOON HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178735</link>
      <description>Partnership firms lack separate legal personality from their partners for income-tax purposes and cannot be assessed as distinct entities. Legal expenses incurred to defend partners and a manager against criminal charges were not deductible because the expenditure served personal objectives, including acquittal and protection of reputation, rather than being incurred solely to earn profits. The same expenditure also did not constitute a business loss: voluntary defence costs that achieved their purpose and did not interrupt business operations were not losses in the ordinary commercial sense. The claimed expenses were therefore not allowable either as business expenditure or as a trading loss.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Dec 1939 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178735</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>