<?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>1950 (12) TMI 2 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49743</link>
    <description>A Hindu undivided family is treated as resident in British India under Section 4A(b) unless the control and management of its affairs is shown to be wholly outside British India. The decisive test is the seat of direction and control over the family&#039;s income-related affairs, not mere physical presence, attendance in litigation or tax proceedings, or isolated business activity in British India. The party seeking the statutory exception bears the burden of proving exclusive foreign control with proper evidence. On the facts discussed, the absence of material showing continuous control from Colombo meant the presumption of residence was not displaced.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 1950 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2014 09:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88223" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1950 (12) TMI 2 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49743</link>
      <description>A Hindu undivided family is treated as resident in British India under Section 4A(b) unless the control and management of its affairs is shown to be wholly outside British India. The decisive test is the seat of direction and control over the family&#039;s income-related affairs, not mere physical presence, attendance in litigation or tax proceedings, or isolated business activity in British India. The party seeking the statutory exception bears the burden of proving exclusive foreign control with proper evidence. On the facts discussed, the absence of material showing continuous control from Colombo meant the presumption of residence was not displaced.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 1950 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49743</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>