<?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>1980 (3) TMI 244 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152954</link>
    <description>A mere reconstitution of a partnership firm on a partner&#039;s retirement does not, by itself, justify cancellation of recognition under rule 25B where the business continues under the partnership deed. The firm&#039;s change was treated as one of constitution, not dissolution, because the remaining partners carried on the business and the Rules distinguished amendment of registration from dissolution or discontinuance. Recognition could be withdrawn only if the dealer ceased to be a bona fide producer or contravened the Act or Rules, and no such disqualification was shown. Continued recognition for sales tax exemption was therefore restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Jul 2013 13:52:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169991" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (3) TMI 244 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152954</link>
      <description>A mere reconstitution of a partnership firm on a partner&#039;s retirement does not, by itself, justify cancellation of recognition under rule 25B where the business continues under the partnership deed. The firm&#039;s change was treated as one of constitution, not dissolution, because the remaining partners carried on the business and the Rules distinguished amendment of registration from dissolution or discontinuance. Recognition could be withdrawn only if the dealer ceased to be a bona fide producer or contravened the Act or Rules, and no such disqualification was shown. Continued recognition for sales tax exemption was therefore restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152954</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>