<?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>1980 (10) TMI 48 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36338</link>
    <description>Lease money from letting a cinema complex was treated as business income because the property was a commercial undertaking and the arrangement formed part of the financing and completion of the business asset. The assessee retained the cinema licence, remained responsible for key incidents of ownership, and the lease covered the building, equipment, furniture and related commercial facilities. On these facts, the receipt was characterised as exploitation of a commercial asset rather than passive rental income, and it was distinguished from cases where business activity had been abandoned and only property income remained. The amount was therefore assessable as business income and not as income from other sources.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 17:28:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=74884" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (10) TMI 48 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36338</link>
      <description>Lease money from letting a cinema complex was treated as business income because the property was a commercial undertaking and the arrangement formed part of the financing and completion of the business asset. The assessee retained the cinema licence, remained responsible for key incidents of ownership, and the lease covered the building, equipment, furniture and related commercial facilities. On these facts, the receipt was characterised as exploitation of a commercial asset rather than passive rental income, and it was distinguished from cases where business activity had been abandoned and only property income remained. The amount was therefore assessable as business income and not as income from other sources.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36338</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>