<?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>1959 (7) TMI 58 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276664</link>
    <description>A direct and continuing right to receive a share of land revenue can retain the character of agricultural income where the receipt is derived from the land revenue itself, even though the recipient&#039;s original rights in the land have been extinguished. The settlement here conferred a perpetual entitlement to one-fourth of net land revenue collections after deductions, and the Government acted only as collector before passing the amount on. The receipt was neither a mere allowance or pension from general funds nor a fixed sum unrelated to the revenue source. It was therefore treated as agricultural income and fell outside tax liability under the statutory definition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Nov 2018 14:45:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=542002" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1959 (7) TMI 58 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276664</link>
      <description>A direct and continuing right to receive a share of land revenue can retain the character of agricultural income where the receipt is derived from the land revenue itself, even though the recipient&#039;s original rights in the land have been extinguished. The settlement here conferred a perpetual entitlement to one-fourth of net land revenue collections after deductions, and the Government acted only as collector before passing the amount on. The receipt was neither a mere allowance or pension from general funds nor a fixed sum unrelated to the revenue source. It was therefore treated as agricultural income and fell outside tax liability under the statutory definition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276664</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>