<?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>2018 (8) TMI 2043 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296087</link>
    <description>The High Court, in an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, ruled in favor of the appellant assessee. The court held that transfer charges and non-occupancy charges were covered by the principle of mutuality and not chargeable to tax, based on the precedent set by the Supreme Court in a related case. Consequently, the appeals were allowed in favor of the appellant and against the respondent revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Jul 2021 08:55:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=648566" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 2043 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296087</link>
      <description>The High Court, in an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, ruled in favor of the appellant assessee. The court held that transfer charges and non-occupancy charges were covered by the principle of mutuality and not chargeable to tax, based on the precedent set by the Supreme Court in a related case. Consequently, the appeals were allowed in favor of the appellant and against the respondent revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296087</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>