<?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>1957 (8) TMI 24 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168676</link>
    <description>A partner who obtained registration of a firm on the footing that he was an individual partner was bound, in personal assessment, by that apportionment of income. The assessment scheme under Section 23(5)(a) required the share of each named partner to be included in that partner&#039;s total income, and an objection to the allocation had to be raised in the firm&#039;s assessment, not the partner&#039;s personal assessment. A later private arrangement among persons connected with the firm could not amount to diversion of income by overriding title; at most it was an application of income already earned. Amounts payable to others were also not deductible as expenditure incurred in earning the income.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Aug 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2015 17:09:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=379267" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1957 (8) TMI 24 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168676</link>
      <description>A partner who obtained registration of a firm on the footing that he was an individual partner was bound, in personal assessment, by that apportionment of income. The assessment scheme under Section 23(5)(a) required the share of each named partner to be included in that partner&#039;s total income, and an objection to the allocation had to be raised in the firm&#039;s assessment, not the partner&#039;s personal assessment. A later private arrangement among persons connected with the firm could not amount to diversion of income by overriding title; at most it was an application of income already earned. Amounts payable to others were also not deductible as expenditure incurred in earning the income.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Aug 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168676</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>