<?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>1983 (12) TMI 22 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27358</link>
    <description>The court upheld the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision to exclude the managing director&#039;s salary from assessment in the assessee&#039;s hands and direct its assessment in the spouse&#039;s hands. It was determined that the assessee did not possess technical or professional qualifications as required by the proviso to section 64(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court emphasized that mere possession of a degree qualification without specific technical or professional relevance to the position does not meet the proviso&#039;s requirements for income attribution. Thus, the salary was rightly assessed in the spouse&#039;s hands due to the lack of technical or professional qualifications by the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:16:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=66356" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (12) TMI 22 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27358</link>
      <description>The court upheld the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision to exclude the managing director&#039;s salary from assessment in the assessee&#039;s hands and direct its assessment in the spouse&#039;s hands. It was determined that the assessee did not possess technical or professional qualifications as required by the proviso to section 64(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court emphasized that mere possession of a degree qualification without specific technical or professional relevance to the position does not meet the proviso&#039;s requirements for income attribution. Thus, the salary was rightly assessed in the spouse&#039;s hands due to the lack of technical or professional qualifications by the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27358</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>