<?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 (9) TMI 45 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7537</link>
    <description>A partner&#039;s interest in a firm is transferable property, but a gift under the Gift-tax Act arises only where the transfer is voluntary and without consideration in money or money&#039;s worth. On the facts discussed, admitting two employees as partners was not gratuitous because they contributed experience, assumed liability for losses, were to work in the business, and their admission avoided the need to pay them as employees. The revenue failed to prove absence of consideration. The transaction therefore did not amount to a taxable gift, and it was unnecessary to decide whether it constituted a transfer within the wider charging definitions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 18:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=46587" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (9) TMI 45 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7537</link>
      <description>A partner&#039;s interest in a firm is transferable property, but a gift under the Gift-tax Act arises only where the transfer is voluntary and without consideration in money or money&#039;s worth. On the facts discussed, admitting two employees as partners was not gratuitous because they contributed experience, assumed liability for losses, were to work in the business, and their admission avoided the need to pay them as employees. The revenue failed to prove absence of consideration. The transaction therefore did not amount to a taxable gift, and it was unnecessary to decide whether it constituted a transfer within the wider charging definitions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7537</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>