<?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>1962 (4) TMI 123 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276379</link>
    <description>The court ruled in favor of the assessee, determining that the transactions were not speculative and the losses were deductible as business losses under section 10 for the assessment years 1953-54 and 1954-55. The court clarified the interpretation of the first proviso to section 24(1) and emphasized the distinction between speculative and hedging transactions, ultimately finding in favor of the assessee based on the nature of the transactions involved.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2018 14:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=541158" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1962 (4) TMI 123 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276379</link>
      <description>The court ruled in favor of the assessee, determining that the transactions were not speculative and the losses were deductible as business losses under section 10 for the assessment years 1953-54 and 1954-55. The court clarified the interpretation of the first proviso to section 24(1) and emphasized the distinction between speculative and hedging transactions, ultimately finding in favor of the assessee based on the nature of the transactions involved.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276379</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>