<?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>1954 (10) TMI 44 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190395</link>
    <description>Payment received from government for temporary occupation of land was characterised as compensation for loss of income (prevention from enjoying the usufruct) rather than a capital receipt because there was no agreement as to rent, no damage, and no permanent deprivation or sterilisation of the capital asset; accordingly the sum is taxable as income from other sources and not excludable as capital.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 1954 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2017 15:20:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=458582" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1954 (10) TMI 44 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190395</link>
      <description>Payment received from government for temporary occupation of land was characterised as compensation for loss of income (prevention from enjoying the usufruct) rather than a capital receipt because there was no agreement as to rent, no damage, and no permanent deprivation or sterilisation of the capital asset; accordingly the sum is taxable as income from other sources and not excludable as capital.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 1954 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190395</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>