<?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>1951 (9) TMI 53 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277479</link>
    <description>Film-hire receipts under both fixed-hire and percentage-of-collections contracts were held to accrue wholly in the Native States because the assessee acquired an enforceable right to payment only when the films were delivered and exhibited there, or when collections were made there; the place where the contracts were made in British India was not decisive. The receipts were therefore exempt from excess profits tax under the third proviso to Section 5. The further contention that profits should be apportioned between British India and the Native States was not entertainable on reference because it had not been raised before the tax authorities or the Tribunal and did not arise from the Tribunal&#039;s order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2018 12:53:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=545650" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1951 (9) TMI 53 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277479</link>
      <description>Film-hire receipts under both fixed-hire and percentage-of-collections contracts were held to accrue wholly in the Native States because the assessee acquired an enforceable right to payment only when the films were delivered and exhibited there, or when collections were made there; the place where the contracts were made in British India was not decisive. The receipts were therefore exempt from excess profits tax under the third proviso to Section 5. The further contention that profits should be apportioned between British India and the Native States was not entertainable on reference because it had not been raised before the tax authorities or the Tribunal and did not arise from the Tribunal&#039;s order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277479</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>