<?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>2000 (7) TMI 35 - JAMMU AND KASHMIR High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14763</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the validity of the agreement between the karta of the Hindu undivided family and his wife, ruling that the salary paid to the karta was justifiable as a legitimate business expense. The court determined that the Income-tax Officer did not have the right to challenge the agreement, emphasizing that such agreements are voidable, not void. Therefore, the court concluded in favor of the assessee, allowing the salary as a deductible expenditure and disposing of the reference without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 15:12:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=53763" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (7) TMI 35 - JAMMU AND KASHMIR High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14763</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the validity of the agreement between the karta of the Hindu undivided family and his wife, ruling that the salary paid to the karta was justifiable as a legitimate business expense. The court determined that the Income-tax Officer did not have the right to challenge the agreement, emphasizing that such agreements are voidable, not void. Therefore, the court concluded in favor of the assessee, allowing the salary as a deductible expenditure and disposing of the reference without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14763</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>