<?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>1982 (5) TMI 10 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28643</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the application, stating that the question did not arise based on the facts of the case. The judgment clarified the tax treatment of income from property used for business purposes, emphasizing the distinction between income from property let out by an individual versus a partnership firm. It highlighted the specific tax provisions applicable in such scenarios and provided a definitive interpretation regarding the assessment of income in partnership arrangements involving property letting.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 May 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 15:17:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=67640" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (5) TMI 10 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28643</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the application, stating that the question did not arise based on the facts of the case. The judgment clarified the tax treatment of income from property used for business purposes, emphasizing the distinction between income from property let out by an individual versus a partnership firm. It highlighted the specific tax provisions applicable in such scenarios and provided a definitive interpretation regarding the assessment of income in partnership arrangements involving property letting.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 May 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28643</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>