<?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 (1) TMI 178 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66759</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal and granted registration to the firm despite the presence of a minor partner. Padmapriya, who was a minor when the partnership deed was executed, became a full-fledged partner after turning 18 and signed the registration application indicating her intention. The Tribunal held that she could not be held responsible for losses accrued while she was a minor, as profit accrues only on the last day of the accounting year when she was a major.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jan 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 11:15:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=105194" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (1) TMI 178 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66759</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal and granted registration to the firm despite the presence of a minor partner. Padmapriya, who was a minor when the partnership deed was executed, became a full-fledged partner after turning 18 and signed the registration application indicating her intention. The Tribunal held that she could not be held responsible for losses accrued while she was a minor, as profit accrues only on the last day of the accounting year when she was a major.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jan 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66759</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>