<?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>1970 (9) TMI 8 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7997</link>
    <description>The court held that the credit balance in the account of Vrajlal Trikamlal was the separate property of Mulchand Trikamlal and not the property of the Hindu undivided family (HUF). Consequently, the interest credited in the account was deemed personal income of Mulchand Trikamlal and not deductible in computing the assessee-firm&#039;s total income. The court ruled against the HUF&#039;s claim and in favor of the Commissioner, awarding costs accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 18:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=47045" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1970 (9) TMI 8 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7997</link>
      <description>The court held that the credit balance in the account of Vrajlal Trikamlal was the separate property of Mulchand Trikamlal and not the property of the Hindu undivided family (HUF). Consequently, the interest credited in the account was deemed personal income of Mulchand Trikamlal and not deductible in computing the assessee-firm&#039;s total income. The court ruled against the HUF&#039;s claim and in favor of the Commissioner, awarding costs accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7997</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>