<?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>1984 (7) TMI 167 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67442</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, ruling that the partial dissolution of the partnership firm was valid, the dissolution deed did not require registration under Section 17(1)(b) of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, and the income from the 9 godowns should be assessed as co-ownership income of the partners.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 28 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 16:21:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=105877" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (7) TMI 167 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67442</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, ruling that the partial dissolution of the partnership firm was valid, the dissolution deed did not require registration under Section 17(1)(b) of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, and the income from the 9 godowns should be assessed as co-ownership income of the partners.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 28 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67442</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>