<?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>1953 (5) TMI 27 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277014</link>
    <description>Receipts consisting of commission for securing orders and advising on marketable goods, together with an amount for guaranteeing bad debts, were held to be business income rather than salary. The Court applied the control test and found that the assessee was not acting as a servant under the mills&#039; control but was carrying on an independent commercial venture, assuming personal liability for bad debts and bearing the risk of profit or loss. Those features were inconsistent with an employment relationship. The receipts were therefore profits from business within Section 2(5) of the Excess Profits Tax Act, and the reference was answered in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 1953 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2018 10:25:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=543142" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1953 (5) TMI 27 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277014</link>
      <description>Receipts consisting of commission for securing orders and advising on marketable goods, together with an amount for guaranteeing bad debts, were held to be business income rather than salary. The Court applied the control test and found that the assessee was not acting as a servant under the mills&#039; control but was carrying on an independent commercial venture, assuming personal liability for bad debts and bearing the risk of profit or loss. Those features were inconsistent with an employment relationship. The receipts were therefore profits from business within Section 2(5) of the Excess Profits Tax Act, and the reference was answered in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 1953 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277014</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>