<?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>1968 (10) TMI 4 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7372</link>
    <description>Agricultural land was treated as outside estate-duty charge unless brought within the statutory scheme applicable to States in the First Schedule under article 252, and the Court applied the widest meaning of agricultural land by looking to the general character of the land rather than temporary use. On the materials, the Tribunal&#039;s finding that the forest lands were non-agricultural was unsupported, so the revenue failed to justify inclusion of their value in the taxable estate. The Court also rejected reliance on section 30 of the Estate Duty (Amendment) Act, 1958, as unavailable and unsustainable on the construction of the principal Act. The question was answered against the revenue, subject to exclusion of 5,000 acres of rocky land found non-agricultural.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Oct 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2009 19:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=46423" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (10) TMI 4 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7372</link>
      <description>Agricultural land was treated as outside estate-duty charge unless brought within the statutory scheme applicable to States in the First Schedule under article 252, and the Court applied the widest meaning of agricultural land by looking to the general character of the land rather than temporary use. On the materials, the Tribunal&#039;s finding that the forest lands were non-agricultural was unsupported, so the revenue failed to justify inclusion of their value in the taxable estate. The Court also rejected reliance on section 30 of the Estate Duty (Amendment) Act, 1958, as unavailable and unsustainable on the construction of the principal Act. The question was answered against the revenue, subject to exclusion of 5,000 acres of rocky land found non-agricultural.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Oct 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7372</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>