<?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>2001 (6) TMI 813 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185960</link>
    <description>Section 41(2) was discussed as applying only within its limited statutory scope in a transfer of a going concern by a holding company to its wholly owned subsidiary, with Section 47 noted as relevant to the treatment of such intra-group transfers. The article states that the Court followed an earlier binding decision on both referred questions: the applicability of Section 41(2) was resolved against the assessee to the extent indicated, and the correctness of the AAC&#039;s direction to reframe the assessment was also determined in favour of the Revenue. The discussion emphasises that the issues were treated as concluded by prior precedent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2016 13:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=439986" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (6) TMI 813 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185960</link>
      <description>Section 41(2) was discussed as applying only within its limited statutory scope in a transfer of a going concern by a holding company to its wholly owned subsidiary, with Section 47 noted as relevant to the treatment of such intra-group transfers. The article states that the Court followed an earlier binding decision on both referred questions: the applicability of Section 41(2) was resolved against the assessee to the extent indicated, and the correctness of the AAC&#039;s direction to reframe the assessment was also determined in favour of the Revenue. The discussion emphasises that the issues were treated as concluded by prior precedent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185960</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>