<?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>1979 (3) TMI 1 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5197</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court dismissed three appeals by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Mysore, regarding the assessment of the Dowager Maharani of Gondal&#039;s wealth-tax liability. The dispute centered on a family arrangement after her husband&#039;s death, involving a sum of Rs. 30,00,000 payable to her son. The court held that the liability under the family arrangement was valid, enforceable, and deductible under the Wealth Tax Act. Emphasizing the binding nature of the family arrangement, the court upheld the High Court&#039;s decision in favor of the assessee, ruling against the appellant&#039;s arguments on lack of consideration and voidability under the Contract Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2015 12:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=44280" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (3) TMI 1 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5197</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court dismissed three appeals by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Mysore, regarding the assessment of the Dowager Maharani of Gondal&#039;s wealth-tax liability. The dispute centered on a family arrangement after her husband&#039;s death, involving a sum of Rs. 30,00,000 payable to her son. The court held that the liability under the family arrangement was valid, enforceable, and deductible under the Wealth Tax Act. Emphasizing the binding nature of the family arrangement, the court upheld the High Court&#039;s decision in favor of the assessee, ruling against the appellant&#039;s arguments on lack of consideration and voidability under the Contract Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5197</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>