<?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>1976 (10) TMI 143 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151420</link>
    <description>The Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 was construed to permit assessment of a successor partnership where the original dealer died before assessment began, because section 17 contains an express deeming provision treating the transferee as registered for the Act&#039;s purposes if the same business continues. The court treated succession by operation of law as within the statutory language and distinguished the position from the Income-tax Act, where no equivalent deeming provision was relied upon. On that construction, succession to the business did not defeat assessment, and the transferee carrying on the business fell within the tax liability scheme.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Oct 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2013 16:53:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168458" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (10) TMI 143 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151420</link>
      <description>The Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 was construed to permit assessment of a successor partnership where the original dealer died before assessment began, because section 17 contains an express deeming provision treating the transferee as registered for the Act&#039;s purposes if the same business continues. The court treated succession by operation of law as within the statutory language and distinguished the position from the Income-tax Act, where no equivalent deeming provision was relied upon. On that construction, succession to the business did not defeat assessment, and the transferee carrying on the business fell within the tax liability scheme.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Oct 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151420</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>