https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62833 The tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)'s decision that the withdrawal of development rebate from a partnership firm was not justified as the dissolution of the firm upon the death of a partner did not constitute a transfer of assets as required by law. The tribunal clarified that the transfer of assets must be by the assessee to trigger the provision, and in this case, there was no such transfer. Additionally, the tribunal ruled that the non-utilization of the development rebate reserve within eight years did not necessitate immediate post-8-year utilization. Consequently, the appeals by the revenue were dismissed. en-us Mon, 12 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Jan 2011 11:30:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62833 The tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)'s decision that the withdrawal of development rebate from a partnership firm was not justified as the dissolution of the firm upon the death of a partner did not constitute a transfer of assets as required by law. The tribunal clarified that the transfer of assets must be by the assessee to trigger the provision, and in this case, there was no such transfer. Additionally, the tribunal ruled that the non-utilization of the development rebate reserve within eight years did not necessitate immediate post-8-year utilization. Consequently, the appeals by the revenue were dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 12 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62833