<?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 (3) TMI 122 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275979</link>
    <description>A loss from theft of cash carried by an assessee after encashing business receipts was held not to be a trade loss deductible in computing business profits. A deduction is available only where the loss springs directly from, and is inseparable from, the carrying on of the business; a merely remote connection is insufficient. On the facts, cashing the cheque and carrying the money on the person was not itself part of the business, so the theft did not arise out of business operations. Cases involving embezzlement or defalcation by agents or employees were distinguished because those losses arose from persons entrusted with business management. The loss was therefore not an allowable deduction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Mar 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2018 17:01:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=539427" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1961 (3) TMI 122 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275979</link>
      <description>A loss from theft of cash carried by an assessee after encashing business receipts was held not to be a trade loss deductible in computing business profits. A deduction is available only where the loss springs directly from, and is inseparable from, the carrying on of the business; a merely remote connection is insufficient. On the facts, cashing the cheque and carrying the money on the person was not itself part of the business, so the theft did not arise out of business operations. Cases involving embezzlement or defalcation by agents or employees were distinguished because those losses arose from persons entrusted with business management. The loss was therefore not an allowable deduction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Mar 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275979</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>