<?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 (10) TMI 46 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23751</link>
    <description>The High Court of Bombay held that the surplus amount of Rs. 1,13,745, resulting from the devaluation of the rupee, was taxable as a revenue receipt for the assessee engaged in the business of copper bars. The court considered the amount received from insurers as part of the payment for the seized goods, establishing it as a trading receipt. Emphasizing the nature of the asset involved in the loss, the court upheld the decision that the surplus amount was taxable as a revenue receipt, ruling in favor of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Dec 2009 17:21:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=62749" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (10) TMI 46 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23751</link>
      <description>The High Court of Bombay held that the surplus amount of Rs. 1,13,745, resulting from the devaluation of the rupee, was taxable as a revenue receipt for the assessee engaged in the business of copper bars. The court considered the amount received from insurers as part of the payment for the seized goods, establishing it as a trading receipt. Emphasizing the nature of the asset involved in the loss, the court upheld the decision that the surplus amount was taxable as a revenue receipt, ruling in favor of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23751</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>