<?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>1993 (6) TMI 44 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20531</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the revision, setting aside the Tribunal&#039;s order treating the consideration received as income from slaughter-tapping. It emphasized the Revenue&#039;s burden to prove slaughter-tapping occurrence, criticized the Tribunal&#039;s faulty reasoning, and lack of evidence. The Court directed compliance with its decision, without awarding costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:31:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=59530" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (6) TMI 44 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20531</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the revision, setting aside the Tribunal&#039;s order treating the consideration received as income from slaughter-tapping. It emphasized the Revenue&#039;s burden to prove slaughter-tapping occurrence, criticized the Tribunal&#039;s faulty reasoning, and lack of evidence. The Court directed compliance with its decision, without awarding costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20531</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>