<?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>1986 (9) TMI 112 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61944</link>
    <description>The Tribunal confirmed the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax&#039;s decision to delete the share income included in the assessment, emphasizing the importance of the partnership deed terms in determining profit allocation. The judgment highlighted that the retiring partner was not entitled to the share income allocated after retirement, in line with the Supreme Court precedent cited. The appeal by the revenue challenging the AAC&#039;s decision was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2011 12:04:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=100390" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (9) TMI 112 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61944</link>
      <description>The Tribunal confirmed the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax&#039;s decision to delete the share income included in the assessment, emphasizing the importance of the partnership deed terms in determining profit allocation. The judgment highlighted that the retiring partner was not entitled to the share income allocated after retirement, in line with the Supreme Court precedent cited. The appeal by the revenue challenging the AAC&#039;s decision was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61944</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>