<?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>1967 (6) TMI 17 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7231</link>
    <description>Damages received for breach of a commodity supply contract are not speculative receipts unless the underlying contract is itself settled otherwise than by actual delivery or transfer. The court distinguished a contractual settlement from a post-breach claim for damages: where the buyer failed to open the agreed letter of credit, the seller&#039;s receipt was compensation for breach under contract and sale of goods law, not a speculative transaction within Explanation 2 to section 24(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. The amount therefore could not be treated as speculative income for set-off purposes, and the answer was against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2009 09:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=46282" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (6) TMI 17 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7231</link>
      <description>Damages received for breach of a commodity supply contract are not speculative receipts unless the underlying contract is itself settled otherwise than by actual delivery or transfer. The court distinguished a contractual settlement from a post-breach claim for damages: where the buyer failed to open the agreed letter of credit, the seller&#039;s receipt was compensation for breach under contract and sale of goods law, not a speculative transaction within Explanation 2 to section 24(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. The amount therefore could not be treated as speculative income for set-off purposes, and the answer was against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7231</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>