<?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 (3) TMI 6 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49578</link>
    <description>A cash annuity received in lieu of a village grant was held to be a maintenance allowance and therefore exempt from tax under paragraph 15(1)(i) of the Part B States (Taxation Concessions) Order, 1950. The Tribunal found, on the family arrangement and surrounding correspondence, that the recipient had been maintained since 1922 and that the village grant itself was by way of maintenance, even though the documents also referred to status, dignity and prestige. Maintenance was not limited to food and clothing and could reflect the status of the recipient. On reference, the SC held that the High Court could not reappreciate the Tribunal&#039;s findings under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2014 11:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88058" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1960 (3) TMI 6 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49578</link>
      <description>A cash annuity received in lieu of a village grant was held to be a maintenance allowance and therefore exempt from tax under paragraph 15(1)(i) of the Part B States (Taxation Concessions) Order, 1950. The Tribunal found, on the family arrangement and surrounding correspondence, that the recipient had been maintained since 1922 and that the village grant itself was by way of maintenance, even though the documents also referred to status, dignity and prestige. Maintenance was not limited to food and clothing and could reflect the status of the recipient. On reference, the SC held that the High Court could not reappreciate the Tribunal&#039;s findings under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49578</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>