<?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>1981 (4) TMI 53 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29560</link>
    <description>Excess local fund cess collected under a lease was not taxable income when a competent civil court later held the assessee had no legal right to recover more than the amount actually payable and ordered refund of the excess. The binding adjudication established that the receipts had been obtained under a mistaken belief of contractual liability, and that finding related back to the time of receipt. As a result, the excess amounts never acquired the character of income in the relevant assessment years. An earlier Supreme Court ruling on similar receipts did not govern this issue because it did not consider the later decree and refund.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 17:09:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68557" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (4) TMI 53 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29560</link>
      <description>Excess local fund cess collected under a lease was not taxable income when a competent civil court later held the assessee had no legal right to recover more than the amount actually payable and ordered refund of the excess. The binding adjudication established that the receipts had been obtained under a mistaken belief of contractual liability, and that finding related back to the time of receipt. As a result, the excess amounts never acquired the character of income in the relevant assessment years. An earlier Supreme Court ruling on similar receipts did not govern this issue because it did not consider the later decree and refund.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29560</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>