<?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>2006 (9) TMI 561 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185016</link>
    <description>Hire-purchase receipts from vehicle transactions were held outside the Interest-tax Act because the assessee bought the vehicles in its own name, retained ownership, and hired them to customers under hire-purchase agreements. No loan or advance was made to the customers, and they were not parties to the purchase transaction. Applying sections 2(5), 2(7) and 5, the court treated the receipts as arising from a hire-purchase arrangement rather than a financing arrangement. The right of repossession on default reinforced that characterisation, so the receipts were not chargeable to interest-tax and the revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2016 18:32:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=436343" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (9) TMI 561 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185016</link>
      <description>Hire-purchase receipts from vehicle transactions were held outside the Interest-tax Act because the assessee bought the vehicles in its own name, retained ownership, and hired them to customers under hire-purchase agreements. No loan or advance was made to the customers, and they were not parties to the purchase transaction. Applying sections 2(5), 2(7) and 5, the court treated the receipts as arising from a hire-purchase arrangement rather than a financing arrangement. The right of repossession on default reinforced that characterisation, so the receipts were not chargeable to interest-tax and the revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185016</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>