<?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>1991 (4) TMI 83 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22183</link>
    <description>Income from an arbitration award was taxable in the year it accrued, and the assessee did not establish any legal basis to defer assessment to the years of supply of goods. The plea of double taxation also failed because the Tribunal found that the amount had not already been assessed in earlier years; in any event, an erroneous assessment in another year would not affect taxation in the year when the income was properly assessable. On that footing, no referable question of law arose.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 18:31:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=61182" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (4) TMI 83 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22183</link>
      <description>Income from an arbitration award was taxable in the year it accrued, and the assessee did not establish any legal basis to defer assessment to the years of supply of goods. The plea of double taxation also failed because the Tribunal found that the amount had not already been assessed in earlier years; in any event, an erroneous assessment in another year would not affect taxation in the year when the income was properly assessable. On that footing, no referable question of law arose.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22183</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>