<?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>1961 (12) TMI 98 - High Court Of Madras</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193207</link>
    <description>Receipts for writing books and contributing articles were held to arise from a vocation, so they could not qualify as a casual and non-recurring receipt under section 4(3)(vii) of the Indian Income-tax Act. The exemption was confined to receipts that were not from business, profession, vocation or occupation and were truly casual in character. A motive to earn a livelihood was not necessary for an activity to amount to a vocation, and a voluntary payment made as a reward for work done remained income even if not contractually due. The payment&#039;s character and the aggregate remuneration showed expectancy of earnings rather than a pure gift, so the receipt was taxable and the exemption failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jul 2017 11:41:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=481698" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1961 (12) TMI 98 - High Court Of Madras</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193207</link>
      <description>Receipts for writing books and contributing articles were held to arise from a vocation, so they could not qualify as a casual and non-recurring receipt under section 4(3)(vii) of the Indian Income-tax Act. The exemption was confined to receipts that were not from business, profession, vocation or occupation and were truly casual in character. A motive to earn a livelihood was not necessary for an activity to amount to a vocation, and a voluntary payment made as a reward for work done remained income even if not contractually due. The payment&#039;s character and the aggregate remuneration showed expectancy of earnings rather than a pure gift, so the receipt was taxable and the exemption failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193207</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>