<?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>1976 (4) TMI 69 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66261</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the partnership firm was not dissolved upon the death of a partner and that the entries in the account books were recognized as a valid instrument of partnership. The assessee was directed to file the required forms and apply for condonation of delay, with the Income-tax Officer instructed to consider the specific circumstances of the case. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, highlighting the technical compliance requirements and the genuine confusion experienced by the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Apr 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Feb 2011 12:13:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=104696" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (4) TMI 69 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66261</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the partnership firm was not dissolved upon the death of a partner and that the entries in the account books were recognized as a valid instrument of partnership. The assessee was directed to file the required forms and apply for condonation of delay, with the Income-tax Officer instructed to consider the specific circumstances of the case. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, highlighting the technical compliance requirements and the genuine confusion experienced by the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Apr 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66261</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>