<?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>1936 (12) TMI 31 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286885</link>
    <description>Specific statutory exemptions for War Loan interest, India Government stock interest, and comparable foreign or colonial company securities could not be overridden by reclassifying the receipts as trading profits under Schedule D. The court treated the exemptions as applying to the income itself, and held that the incorporated Schedule C exemption also extended through the Schedule D machinery where the rules so provided. It further held that, although exempt interest was excluded from assessable income, related business expenses remained deductible in computing trading profits because the statute contained no express apportionment or disallowance rule.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 1936 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:31:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=607352" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1936 (12) TMI 31 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286885</link>
      <description>Specific statutory exemptions for War Loan interest, India Government stock interest, and comparable foreign or colonial company securities could not be overridden by reclassifying the receipts as trading profits under Schedule D. The court treated the exemptions as applying to the income itself, and held that the incorporated Schedule C exemption also extended through the Schedule D machinery where the rules so provided. It further held that, although exempt interest was excluded from assessable income, related business expenses remained deductible in computing trading profits because the statute contained no express apportionment or disallowance rule.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 1936 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286885</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>