<?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>1996 (1) TMI 52 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18206</link>
    <description>The court held that the amounts paid by the firms to the assessee, a partner in two firms, were not considered salary but rather a share of profits. Consequently, the assessee was not entitled to claim a standard deduction under section 16 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court ruled in favor of the Department, emphasizing that the remuneration received by the assessee was not in the nature of salary, as clarified by relevant legal provisions and judicial precedents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 14:29:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=57206" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (1) TMI 52 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18206</link>
      <description>The court held that the amounts paid by the firms to the assessee, a partner in two firms, were not considered salary but rather a share of profits. Consequently, the assessee was not entitled to claim a standard deduction under section 16 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court ruled in favor of the Department, emphasizing that the remuneration received by the assessee was not in the nature of salary, as clarified by relevant legal provisions and judicial precedents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18206</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>