<?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>1983 (2) TMI 65 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56949</link>
    <description>Amounts collected as penalties for breaching an association&#039;s rules were not receipts for any individualized service to members; they were only consequences of default and therefore fell outside income from &quot;specific services performed for members&quot; under section 28(iii). The penalty receipts were held not taxable. Re-admission fees collected when a suspended member was reinstated were likewise treated as admission-related charges, not consideration for specific services, and were not taxable under section 28(iii). The tribunal applied the test that taxable receipts under this provision require a direct payment for a particular, identifiable benefit to the member, which was absent on both counts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Dec 2010 15:00:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=95411" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (2) TMI 65 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56949</link>
      <description>Amounts collected as penalties for breaching an association&#039;s rules were not receipts for any individualized service to members; they were only consequences of default and therefore fell outside income from &quot;specific services performed for members&quot; under section 28(iii). The penalty receipts were held not taxable. Re-admission fees collected when a suspended member was reinstated were likewise treated as admission-related charges, not consideration for specific services, and were not taxable under section 28(iii). The tribunal applied the test that taxable receipts under this provision require a direct payment for a particular, identifiable benefit to the member, which was absent on both counts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56949</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>