<?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>1975 (8) TMI 11 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38806</link>
    <description>Receipts from repeated annual sales of spontaneously grown forest trees on gifted land were treated as revenue receipts, not capital receipts, because the trees were sold without evidence of any diminution of a capital asset. The assessee&#039;s own accounting treatment, including crediting the net proceeds to profit and loss account and claiming related expenditure, supported the income character of the receipts. In a taxability dispute, the department ordinarily bears the burden of bringing the receipt within the taxing provision, but where the source and accounting treatment indicate income, the taxpayer must justify any capital claim. The proposed apportionment between capital and revenue lacked evidentiary basis, so the full sale proceeds were taxable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Apr 2010 11:29:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=77352" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (8) TMI 11 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38806</link>
      <description>Receipts from repeated annual sales of spontaneously grown forest trees on gifted land were treated as revenue receipts, not capital receipts, because the trees were sold without evidence of any diminution of a capital asset. The assessee&#039;s own accounting treatment, including crediting the net proceeds to profit and loss account and claiming related expenditure, supported the income character of the receipts. In a taxability dispute, the department ordinarily bears the burden of bringing the receipt within the taxing provision, but where the source and accounting treatment indicate income, the taxpayer must justify any capital claim. The proposed apportionment between capital and revenue lacked evidentiary basis, so the full sale proceeds were taxable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38806</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>