<?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>1997 (2) TMI 58 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16869</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, ruling that a godown qualifies as a &quot;house&quot; under section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act. The Court considered the broad interpretation of the term &quot;house&quot; to include commercial buildings, in line with a circular from the Central Board of Direct Taxes. Consequently, the godown owned by the assessee was deemed eligible for exemption, and the Department&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Sep 2009 16:44:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=55869" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (2) TMI 58 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16869</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, ruling that a godown qualifies as a &quot;house&quot; under section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act. The Court considered the broad interpretation of the term &quot;house&quot; to include commercial buildings, in line with a circular from the Central Board of Direct Taxes. Consequently, the godown owned by the assessee was deemed eligible for exemption, and the Department&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16869</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>