<?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>1972 (9) TMI 20 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8720</link>
    <description>A surrender and release of a prior life interest in trust property did not amount to a transfer of assets to the minor children where the children took only the accelerated benefit of interests already created in their favour under the original settlement; the Revenue&#039;s contention under the income-tax anti-avoidance provision failed. Educational expenditure incurred by the assessee&#039;s minor children could not be added to the assessee&#039;s expenditure under the Expenditure-tax Act because the children were found not to be mainly or wholly dependent on the assessee, and that factual finding stood. Both questions were answered against the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 11:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=47762" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (9) TMI 20 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8720</link>
      <description>A surrender and release of a prior life interest in trust property did not amount to a transfer of assets to the minor children where the children took only the accelerated benefit of interests already created in their favour under the original settlement; the Revenue&#039;s contention under the income-tax anti-avoidance provision failed. Educational expenditure incurred by the assessee&#039;s minor children could not be added to the assessee&#039;s expenditure under the Expenditure-tax Act because the children were found not to be mainly or wholly dependent on the assessee, and that factual finding stood. Both questions were answered against the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8720</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>