<?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 (12) TMI 76 - MYSORE HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128458</link>
    <description>A partnership firm assessed to sales tax for turnover earned during the assessment year remained liable despite later dissolution, because dissolution did not extinguish the tax already incurred and the partners were jointly and severally liable for acts done while they were partners. The transferee-liability provision was held to be supplementary, not a substitute for the charging provision, so a partner who took over assets and liabilities was not exclusively liable on that basis alone. An assessment made on the partnership as a taxable unit also was not invalid merely because the firm had ceased to exist when the order was passed. The demand and recovery proceedings against the partners were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Dec 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Apr 2013 10:05:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165327" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1961 (12) TMI 76 - MYSORE HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128458</link>
      <description>A partnership firm assessed to sales tax for turnover earned during the assessment year remained liable despite later dissolution, because dissolution did not extinguish the tax already incurred and the partners were jointly and severally liable for acts done while they were partners. The transferee-liability provision was held to be supplementary, not a substitute for the charging provision, so a partner who took over assets and liabilities was not exclusively liable on that basis alone. An assessment made on the partnership as a taxable unit also was not invalid merely because the firm had ceased to exist when the order was passed. The demand and recovery proceedings against the partners were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Dec 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128458</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>