<?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>1960 (9) TMI 9 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49550</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the appellant&#039;s petitions challenging assessments for agricultural income-tax under the Orissa Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1947. The appellant, a former Ruler, claimed immunity based on a merger agreement and international law, but the court held that such privileges did not exempt his property from taxation. The court interpreted the Act to include former Rulers as liable for tax, rejecting the appellant&#039;s contentions. Additionally, the court found that claims regarding the transfer of villages and inventory of properties were not properly raised. Ultimately, the appellant was held liable to pay agricultural income-tax, with all appeals dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2015 15:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88030" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1960 (9) TMI 9 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49550</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the appellant&#039;s petitions challenging assessments for agricultural income-tax under the Orissa Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1947. The appellant, a former Ruler, claimed immunity based on a merger agreement and international law, but the court held that such privileges did not exempt his property from taxation. The court interpreted the Act to include former Rulers as liable for tax, rejecting the appellant&#039;s contentions. Additionally, the court found that claims regarding the transfer of villages and inventory of properties were not properly raised. Ultimately, the appellant was held liable to pay agricultural income-tax, with all appeals dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49550</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>