<?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>1928 (11) TMI 2 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191178</link>
    <description>Facts materially indistinguishable from the Scottish authority, and the Indian statutory language was held to be of the same scope and effect, so the earlier construction applied directly. On that basis, the Court rejected the Revenue&#039;s attempt to treat the succession consistently for some purposes and differently for others, and held that the relevant cost basis for computation was the original cost to the predecessor concern, not the takeover value. The reference was answered wholly in favour of the assessee, with costs awarded against the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 1928 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2017 13:19:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=462247" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1928 (11) TMI 2 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191178</link>
      <description>Facts materially indistinguishable from the Scottish authority, and the Indian statutory language was held to be of the same scope and effect, so the earlier construction applied directly. On that basis, the Court rejected the Revenue&#039;s attempt to treat the succession consistently for some purposes and differently for others, and held that the relevant cost basis for computation was the original cost to the predecessor concern, not the takeover value. The reference was answered wholly in favour of the assessee, with costs awarded against the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 1928 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191178</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>