<?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>2007 (8) TMI 330 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33689</link>
    <description>For wealth-tax purposes, a factory building was held not to belong to the assessee-company on the valuation date where possession had been delivered and consideration received, even though a registered sale deed had not yet been executed. The amended wealth-tax provision treating assets &quot;belonging to&quot; a company was read as declaratory and clarificatory, so legal ownership was not confined to absolute title. Applying the principle that a vendee in possession with payment made may be treated as owner for the relevant purpose, the asset was excluded from the company&#039;s net wealth and the impugned addition was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72318" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (8) TMI 330 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33689</link>
      <description>For wealth-tax purposes, a factory building was held not to belong to the assessee-company on the valuation date where possession had been delivered and consideration received, even though a registered sale deed had not yet been executed. The amended wealth-tax provision treating assets &quot;belonging to&quot; a company was read as declaratory and clarificatory, so legal ownership was not confined to absolute title. Applying the principle that a vendee in possession with payment made may be treated as owner for the relevant purpose, the asset was excluded from the company&#039;s net wealth and the impugned addition was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33689</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>