<?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>1987 (3) TMI 57 - PATNA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25499</link>
    <description>The High Court ruled against the assessee-club, rejecting its claim of being a mutual concern. The court held that there was no complete identity between contributors and participators, as non-members also availed club services. Consequently, income from selling liquor and letting out rooms to members and guests was deemed taxable due to the absence of mutuality. The court left open the possibility for reevaluation if evidence supporting mutuality was provided in the future.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:09:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=64497" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (3) TMI 57 - PATNA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25499</link>
      <description>The High Court ruled against the assessee-club, rejecting its claim of being a mutual concern. The court held that there was no complete identity between contributors and participators, as non-members also availed club services. Consequently, income from selling liquor and letting out rooms to members and guests was deemed taxable due to the absence of mutuality. The court left open the possibility for reevaluation if evidence supporting mutuality was provided in the future.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25499</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>