https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276484 Interim payments deposited by the Government under the Estates Abolition Act were treated as compensation for the taking over of the estate, not as income of the erstwhile holder. Section 50(8) was construed as preventing adjustment of interim payments against the final compensation under Section 41(1), rather than characterising those payments as income. The court followed earlier Bench decisions and held that the link between the amount and annual income did not alter its capital nature. The Supreme Court ruling under the Hyderabad Jagirs Regulation was distinguished because it concerned maintenance allowances under a different statutory scheme. The appellant succeeded, and the respondent was entitled only to the proportionate share of compensation found by the Tribunal. en-us Fri, 06 Sep 1963 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Nov 2018 17:52:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276484 Interim payments deposited by the Government under the Estates Abolition Act were treated as compensation for the taking over of the estate, not as income of the erstwhile holder. Section 50(8) was construed as preventing adjustment of interim payments against the final compensation under Section 41(1), rather than characterising those payments as income. The court followed earlier Bench decisions and held that the link between the amount and annual income did not alter its capital nature. The Supreme Court ruling under the Hyderabad Jagirs Regulation was distinguished because it concerned maintenance allowances under a different statutory scheme. The appellant succeeded, and the respondent was entitled only to the proportionate share of compensation found by the Tribunal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 06 Sep 1963 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276484