<?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>2002 (11) TMI 4 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6094</link>
    <description>The High Court determined that the estate duty payable on the death of the life-tenant should be considered in determining wealth-tax valuation, contrary to the Revenue&#039;s argument. The court relied on a judgment that allowed for deductions from market value, in conflict with another precedent. Emphasizing the need for clarity, the court referred the issue to a larger Bench for resolution, directing the appeals to the Chief Justice of India for further action to settle the conflicting interpretations definitively.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=45177" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (11) TMI 4 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6094</link>
      <description>The High Court determined that the estate duty payable on the death of the life-tenant should be considered in determining wealth-tax valuation, contrary to the Revenue&#039;s argument. The court relied on a judgment that allowed for deductions from market value, in conflict with another precedent. Emphasizing the need for clarity, the court referred the issue to a larger Bench for resolution, directing the appeals to the Chief Justice of India for further action to settle the conflicting interpretations definitively.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6094</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>