https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16328 The court determined that the income received by the assessee as a managing director should be treated as her independent income under the proviso to section 64(1)(ii). The court did not address the consideration of shares held by the Hindu undivided family. The deduction under section 80T was held to be admissible only after setting off the capital loss. Additionally, the court ruled that the salary income received by the assessee should be taxed in her hands, not her husband's. All issues were resolved in favor of the assessee, with no order as to costs. en-us Mon, 29 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Sep 2009 10:42:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16328 The court determined that the income received by the assessee as a managing director should be treated as her independent income under the proviso to section 64(1)(ii). The court did not address the consideration of shares held by the Hindu undivided family. The deduction under section 80T was held to be admissible only after setting off the capital loss. Additionally, the court ruled that the salary income received by the assessee should be taxed in her hands, not her husband's. All issues were resolved in favor of the assessee, with no order as to costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 29 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16328