<?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 31 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8854</link>
    <description>Remuneration received by a coparcener from companies in which the HUF held shares is assessable as the individual&#039;s income where it is, in substance, compensation for personal services rather than a return on joint family funds. The fact that family funds were used for shareholding or qualification shares is not conclusive. Where the coparcener devotes full time, performs day-to-day functions, supervises business operations, and is paid for services actually rendered, the receipt retains the character of personal income. The Rajasthan HC accordingly treated the remuneration as the coparcener&#039;s individual income and not includible in the HUF&#039;s income.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=47894" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (9) TMI 31 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8854</link>
      <description>Remuneration received by a coparcener from companies in which the HUF held shares is assessable as the individual&#039;s income where it is, in substance, compensation for personal services rather than a return on joint family funds. The fact that family funds were used for shareholding or qualification shares is not conclusive. Where the coparcener devotes full time, performs day-to-day functions, supervises business operations, and is paid for services actually rendered, the receipt retains the character of personal income. The Rajasthan HC accordingly treated the remuneration as the coparcener&#039;s individual income and not includible in the HUF&#039;s income.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8854</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>