<?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>1962 (8) TMI 126 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289969</link>
    <description>The court ruled against the assessee on both issues. The assessee was not considered a Hindu undivided family for wealth tax assessment, and the excess estate duty was not deductible from the net wealth. The assessee was ordered to pay the costs of the department, with counsel&#039;s fee set at Rs. 250.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2020 13:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=621167" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1962 (8) TMI 126 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289969</link>
      <description>The court ruled against the assessee on both issues. The assessee was not considered a Hindu undivided family for wealth tax assessment, and the excess estate duty was not deductible from the net wealth. The assessee was ordered to pay the costs of the department, with counsel&#039;s fee set at Rs. 250.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289969</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>