<?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>1937 (3) TMI 15 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183865</link>
    <description>A Hindu undivided family&#039;s house-property income was accepted as computed by the tax authority, with no basis found to disturb the assessment. A maintenance payment made under a consent decree to the widow of a deceased coparcener was also held not deductible, because the widow received it as a member of the joint family and the decree did not change the character of the payment. The payment was treated as part of the family&#039;s assessable income, and the diversion-by-overriding-title principle was held inapplicable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 1937 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:50:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=432672" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1937 (3) TMI 15 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183865</link>
      <description>A Hindu undivided family&#039;s house-property income was accepted as computed by the tax authority, with no basis found to disturb the assessment. A maintenance payment made under a consent decree to the widow of a deceased coparcener was also held not deductible, because the widow received it as a member of the joint family and the decree did not change the character of the payment. The payment was treated as part of the family&#039;s assessable income, and the diversion-by-overriding-title principle was held inapplicable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 1937 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183865</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>