<?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 (5) TMI 105 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67874</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the partially partitioned jewellery should not be included in the wealth of the HUF. The amounts attributed to the jewellery were deleted from the total wealth of the assessee HUF for the relevant assessment year. The appeals were allowed, overturning the AAC&#039;s decisions and reinstating the correct legal position regarding partial partition of jewellery and its implications on wealth assessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sun, 20 May 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2011 11:21:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=106309" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (5) TMI 105 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67874</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the partially partitioned jewellery should not be included in the wealth of the HUF. The amounts attributed to the jewellery were deleted from the total wealth of the assessee HUF for the relevant assessment year. The appeals were allowed, overturning the AAC&#039;s decisions and reinstating the correct legal position regarding partial partition of jewellery and its implications on wealth assessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sun, 20 May 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67874</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>