<?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 (1) TMI 39 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36524</link>
    <description>The High Court of Madras held that the loss incurred in repatriating funds from Ceylon was a personal loss and not a business loss. The Court emphasized the distinction between capital and revenue losses, stating that the loss must be incidental to a business activity to be considered for deduction in income computation. As the loss in this case was personal and not related to any business activity, the Court ruled in favor of the revenue, denying the deduction claimed by the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 10:21:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=75070" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (1) TMI 39 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36524</link>
      <description>The High Court of Madras held that the loss incurred in repatriating funds from Ceylon was a personal loss and not a business loss. The Court emphasized the distinction between capital and revenue losses, stating that the loss must be incidental to a business activity to be considered for deduction in income computation. As the loss in this case was personal and not related to any business activity, the Court ruled in favor of the revenue, denying the deduction claimed by the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36524</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>