<?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 (9) TMI 27 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7416</link>
    <description>Litigation expenses are deductible from dividend income under section 12(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 only when they are revenue in character, actually incurred, and laid out solely for earning that income with a real nexus to its source. The provision is narrower than the general business deduction rule in section 10(2)(xv), and a remote or indirect connection is insufficient. On the stated facts, the expenses were incurred to defend the assessee&#039;s personal status as an adopted son, not to protect the investments or earn the dividends. The connection to dividend income was therefore too remote, and the expenditure was not deductible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=46466" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (9) TMI 27 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7416</link>
      <description>Litigation expenses are deductible from dividend income under section 12(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 only when they are revenue in character, actually incurred, and laid out solely for earning that income with a real nexus to its source. The provision is narrower than the general business deduction rule in section 10(2)(xv), and a remote or indirect connection is insufficient. On the stated facts, the expenses were incurred to defend the assessee&#039;s personal status as an adopted son, not to protect the investments or earn the dividends. The connection to dividend income was therefore too remote, and the expenditure was not deductible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7416</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>