<?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>1976 (10) TMI 1 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6492</link>
    <description>An undefined fiscal expression must be construed in its ordinary popular sense in the statutory context, rather than by importing a restricted technical meaning from other legislation. On that approach, &quot;a company whose business consists wholly or mainly in holding of investments&quot; under section 23A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, is wide enough to include a company whose principal income is derived from house property leased to tenants. The Court held that the context of section 23A, together with its legislative history and later developments, supported this broader construction. The assessee-company was therefore correctly treated as one falling within the provision, and the appeals failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Oct 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=45575" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (10) TMI 1 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6492</link>
      <description>An undefined fiscal expression must be construed in its ordinary popular sense in the statutory context, rather than by importing a restricted technical meaning from other legislation. On that approach, &quot;a company whose business consists wholly or mainly in holding of investments&quot; under section 23A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, is wide enough to include a company whose principal income is derived from house property leased to tenants. The Court held that the context of section 23A, together with its legislative history and later developments, supported this broader construction. The assessee-company was therefore correctly treated as one falling within the provision, and the appeals failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Oct 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6492</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>