<?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>1968 (3) TMI 14 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7315</link>
    <description>The court held that the property received by the assessee on partition should be considered as belonging to the Hindu undivided family comprising the assessee, his wife, and minor daughters, rather than solely to the assessee as an individual. The court ruled in favor of the assessee, answering the issue in the affirmative. The assessee was granted costs from the Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P., totaling Rs. 200, inclusive of the special counsel&#039;s fee for the Commissioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Mar 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 20:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=46366" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (3) TMI 14 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7315</link>
      <description>The court held that the property received by the assessee on partition should be considered as belonging to the Hindu undivided family comprising the assessee, his wife, and minor daughters, rather than solely to the assessee as an individual. The court ruled in favor of the assessee, answering the issue in the affirmative. The assessee was granted costs from the Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P., totaling Rs. 200, inclusive of the special counsel&#039;s fee for the Commissioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Mar 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7315</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>