<?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>1989 (4) TMI 16 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23535</link>
    <description>Best judgment assessment of tea turnover must rest on relevant material, fair estimation and the prescribed computation method; taxing the entire taxable turnover as agricultural income was unsustainable because tea income is assessable only to the extent legally attributable to agricultural income after admissible deductions. The assessment and revisional orders were also vitiated by denial of effective opportunity, since the objections were not heard before completion of assessment, and by failure to address the 60% limitation applicable to tea income. Recovery proceedings were not wholly invalid, however, because separate action for other dues could continue. The agricultural income-tax assessments were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh assessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:46:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=62533" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (4) TMI 16 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23535</link>
      <description>Best judgment assessment of tea turnover must rest on relevant material, fair estimation and the prescribed computation method; taxing the entire taxable turnover as agricultural income was unsustainable because tea income is assessable only to the extent legally attributable to agricultural income after admissible deductions. The assessment and revisional orders were also vitiated by denial of effective opportunity, since the objections were not heard before completion of assessment, and by failure to address the 60% limitation applicable to tea income. Recovery proceedings were not wholly invalid, however, because separate action for other dues could continue. The agricultural income-tax assessments were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh assessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23535</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>