<?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>1967 (12) TMI 55 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148286</link>
    <description>After partition of a Hindu undivided family business, the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959 was analysed to determine whether escaped turnover from the pre-partition period could be assessed in the hands of the continuing partnership formed by former coparceners. Section 27 was treated as limited to transfers of business ownership and not to partition of joint family property, because coparceners do not acquire by transfer what they already own. Section 53 was also insufficient without rules covering such a case. In the absence of an express post-partition assessment provision, liability for the former family&#039;s turnover could not be fastened on the partnership, and prohibition was warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 10:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166326" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (12) TMI 55 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148286</link>
      <description>After partition of a Hindu undivided family business, the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959 was analysed to determine whether escaped turnover from the pre-partition period could be assessed in the hands of the continuing partnership formed by former coparceners. Section 27 was treated as limited to transfers of business ownership and not to partition of joint family property, because coparceners do not acquire by transfer what they already own. Section 53 was also insufficient without rules covering such a case. In the absence of an express post-partition assessment provision, liability for the former family&#039;s turnover could not be fastened on the partnership, and prohibition was warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148286</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>