<?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>1972 (12) TMI 1 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6383</link>
    <description>Tax paid by tea-growing assessees on tea-garden lands under the U.P. Large Land Holdings Tax Act, 1957 was treated as deductible business expenditure under section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 because the assessees were regarded as owner-cum-traders and the lands formed part of their business assets. The payment was incurred in the course of business operations and was therefore laid out wholly and exclusively for business purposes. The later amendment in section 40 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 concerning wealth-tax did not control this issue, as the levy in question was not wealth-tax or a comparable charge covered by that provision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=45466" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (12) TMI 1 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6383</link>
      <description>Tax paid by tea-growing assessees on tea-garden lands under the U.P. Large Land Holdings Tax Act, 1957 was treated as deductible business expenditure under section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 because the assessees were regarded as owner-cum-traders and the lands formed part of their business assets. The payment was incurred in the course of business operations and was therefore laid out wholly and exclusively for business purposes. The later amendment in section 40 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 concerning wealth-tax did not control this issue, as the levy in question was not wealth-tax or a comparable charge covered by that provision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6383</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>