<?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>1965 (9) TMI 76 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276353</link>
    <description>The court ruled that the transaction between the assessee-firm and the private limited company was not a sale in the commercial sense. Consequently, the second proviso to section 10(2)(vii) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was deemed inapplicable, and the amount of Rs. 40,743 could not be taxed as profits. The Commissioner was instructed to bear the costs of the reference to the assessee-firm.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2018 10:39:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=541022" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1965 (9) TMI 76 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276353</link>
      <description>The court ruled that the transaction between the assessee-firm and the private limited company was not a sale in the commercial sense. Consequently, the second proviso to section 10(2)(vii) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was deemed inapplicable, and the amount of Rs. 40,743 could not be taxed as profits. The Commissioner was instructed to bear the costs of the reference to the assessee-firm.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276353</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>