<?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>2011 (8) TMI 1298 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273559</link>
    <description>Agricultural income or loss can be recognised where the assessee proves actual agricultural operations, even if the lands are not owned by it. The Tribunal found, as a matter of fact, that the assessee had carried on such operations and that the revenue had accepted similar treatment in earlier years. Because no material was produced to displace that factual finding, interference was not warranted. The claim was therefore upheld and the revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Jul 2018 16:02:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=525452" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (8) TMI 1298 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273559</link>
      <description>Agricultural income or loss can be recognised where the assessee proves actual agricultural operations, even if the lands are not owned by it. The Tribunal found, as a matter of fact, that the assessee had carried on such operations and that the revenue had accepted similar treatment in earlier years. Because no material was produced to displace that factual finding, interference was not warranted. The claim was therefore upheld and the revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273559</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>