<?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>1961 (9) TMI 56 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128408</link>
    <description>A reassessment notice served within the limitation period was treated as valid, and later service of the demand notice did not change the date of the assessment order; the plea of limitation therefore failed. A dissolved partnership remained an assessable unit for sales tax because the statutory scheme treated partners as jointly and severally liable, so assessment in the firm&#039;s name continued to operate against them after dissolution. However, a receipt credited in the name of a partner with an independent business could not be included in the firm&#039;s turnover without material linking it to the partnership business, so that amount was excluded from assessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2013 16:14:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165278" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1961 (9) TMI 56 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128408</link>
      <description>A reassessment notice served within the limitation period was treated as valid, and later service of the demand notice did not change the date of the assessment order; the plea of limitation therefore failed. A dissolved partnership remained an assessable unit for sales tax because the statutory scheme treated partners as jointly and severally liable, so assessment in the firm&#039;s name continued to operate against them after dissolution. However, a receipt credited in the name of a partner with an independent business could not be included in the firm&#039;s turnover without material linking it to the partnership business, so that amount was excluded from assessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128408</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>