<?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>1966 (2) TMI 3 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6655</link>
    <description>Salami receipts received by an incorporated landholding company from settlement and resettlement of its own lands were not business income where the lands and tenancy rights were not dealt with as stock-in-trade. The company&#039;s objects included acquisition, cultivation and leasing of property, but those objects were not conclusive. On the facts, it let its lands to tenants, collected rent, and acquired defaulting tenants&#039; rights only through court auction so the land could be resettled. The receipts were treated as arising from ownership and enjoyment of property, not from trading in tenancy rights, and were therefore not chargeable as business income.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Jan 2009 13:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=45738" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1966 (2) TMI 3 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6655</link>
      <description>Salami receipts received by an incorporated landholding company from settlement and resettlement of its own lands were not business income where the lands and tenancy rights were not dealt with as stock-in-trade. The company&#039;s objects included acquisition, cultivation and leasing of property, but those objects were not conclusive. On the facts, it let its lands to tenants, collected rent, and acquired defaulting tenants&#039; rights only through court auction so the land could be resettled. The receipts were treated as arising from ownership and enjoyment of property, not from trading in tenancy rights, and were therefore not chargeable as business income.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6655</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>