<?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>1992 (7) TMI 123 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66544</link>
    <description>A quasi-judicial order under section 171(3) recognising a Hindu family partial partition remains operative and binding in proceedings under other direct tax laws until it is set aside by a competent authority. On that basis, reopening the estate duty assessment under section 59(b) could not lawfully proceed by ignoring the subsisting partition order. The attempted fresh assessment was therefore not sustainable because it rested on a collateral disregard of a valid and effective order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:07:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=104979" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (7) TMI 123 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66544</link>
      <description>A quasi-judicial order under section 171(3) recognising a Hindu family partial partition remains operative and binding in proceedings under other direct tax laws until it is set aside by a competent authority. On that basis, reopening the estate duty assessment under section 59(b) could not lawfully proceed by ignoring the subsisting partition order. The attempted fresh assessment was therefore not sustainable because it rested on a collateral disregard of a valid and effective order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66544</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>