<?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>1933 (8) TMI 1 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186374</link>
    <description>Losses from transactions in shares and Government securities were held to be capital losses, not deductible business losses under the Income-tax Act, 1922. The Court applied the test of intention, to be inferred from the facts and surrounding circumstances, and distinguished business dealings from capital investment and casual, non-recurring receipts. As the assessee had made only a few sales, generally held the securities for long periods, and acquired them mainly for dividends and interest rather than trading or speculation, the transactions were treated as investment activity. The Court also declined to reopen the factual findings of the tax authorities and found no error of law in their conclusion.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 1933 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2016 17:07:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=441278" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1933 (8) TMI 1 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186374</link>
      <description>Losses from transactions in shares and Government securities were held to be capital losses, not deductible business losses under the Income-tax Act, 1922. The Court applied the test of intention, to be inferred from the facts and surrounding circumstances, and distinguished business dealings from capital investment and casual, non-recurring receipts. As the assessee had made only a few sales, generally held the securities for long periods, and acquired them mainly for dividends and interest rather than trading or speculation, the transactions were treated as investment activity. The Court also declined to reopen the factual findings of the tax authorities and found no error of law in their conclusion.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 1933 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186374</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>