<?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>2013 (11) TMI 731 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239554</link>
    <description>The court held that when a retiring partner receives only money without the distribution of capital assets, there is no transfer of a capital asset, and thus no capital gains tax liability under Section 45(4) of the Income Tax Act. The liability of the retiring partner to pay capital gains tax was deemed irrelevant in this case. The court ruled in favor of the assessee, dismissing the appeal and not awarding any costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Dec 2013 18:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=335831" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 731 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239554</link>
      <description>The court held that when a retiring partner receives only money without the distribution of capital assets, there is no transfer of a capital asset, and thus no capital gains tax liability under Section 45(4) of the Income Tax Act. The liability of the retiring partner to pay capital gains tax was deemed irrelevant in this case. The court ruled in favor of the assessee, dismissing the appeal and not awarding any costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239554</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>