<?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>1983 (4) TMI 106 - ITAT INDORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67064</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the department&#039;s appeals and upheld the Appellate Assistant Commissioner&#039;s decision to recognize the partial partition in the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) with a single coparcener and his wife as a valid family arrangement. The judgment emphasizes the significance of legal principles and precedents in determining the validity of partitions and family arrangements within an HUF, considering the unique circumstances of each case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2011 18:43:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=105499" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (4) TMI 106 - ITAT INDORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67064</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the department&#039;s appeals and upheld the Appellate Assistant Commissioner&#039;s decision to recognize the partial partition in the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) with a single coparcener and his wife as a valid family arrangement. The judgment emphasizes the significance of legal principles and precedents in determining the validity of partitions and family arrangements within an HUF, considering the unique circumstances of each case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67064</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>