<?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 (5) TMI 22 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14961</link>
    <description>Amounts deducted from cane price as members&#039; refundable and non-refundable deposits were held to be trading receipts because the bye-laws treated them as part of the trading arrangement, there was no fixed maturity or immediate enforceable repayment right, and interest payment did not alter their character; the Revenue succeeded on this issue. By contrast, deductions made for area development, cane development, hutment, relief, memorial, education and small savings funds were made under Government directions for specified public purposes and were diverted at source under an overriding title, so they never formed part of the assessee&#039;s income; the assessee succeeded on this issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:06:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=53961" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (5) TMI 22 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14961</link>
      <description>Amounts deducted from cane price as members&#039; refundable and non-refundable deposits were held to be trading receipts because the bye-laws treated them as part of the trading arrangement, there was no fixed maturity or immediate enforceable repayment right, and interest payment did not alter their character; the Revenue succeeded on this issue. By contrast, deductions made for area development, cane development, hutment, relief, memorial, education and small savings funds were made under Government directions for specified public purposes and were diverted at source under an overriding title, so they never formed part of the assessee&#039;s income; the assessee succeeded on this issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14961</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>