<?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>1998 (2) TMI 106 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17087</link>
    <description>The Court held that refunds of income-tax and other direct taxes received after the valuation date are not assets and should not be included in the net wealth of the assessees. The Court ruled in favor of the assessees against the Revenue on this issue. However, the Court determined that amounts in the Compulsory Deposit Scheme are assets to be included in the net wealth of the assessee, ruling in favor of the Revenue on this matter.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 11:25:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=56087" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (2) TMI 106 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17087</link>
      <description>The Court held that refunds of income-tax and other direct taxes received after the valuation date are not assets and should not be included in the net wealth of the assessees. The Court ruled in favor of the assessees against the Revenue on this issue. However, the Court determined that amounts in the Compulsory Deposit Scheme are assets to be included in the net wealth of the assessee, ruling in favor of the Revenue on this matter.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17087</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>