<?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>1971 (6) TMI 2 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8246</link>
    <description>Section 35(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 could be invoked to rectify the assessment and redetermine a partner&#039;s share income after the firm&#039;s status as a registered firm had been upheld by the High Court and the Tribunal. The taxpayer, having pursued that registered-firm status, could not resist the consequential rectification on the footing of the earlier assessment position. The objection that no fresh assessment order had been made on the registered firm was not supported by the affidavit, was raised for the first time at the hearing, and was unsupported by evidence rebutting the presumption that official acts are regularly and lawfully performed. The rectification was treated as valid and within jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=47290" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1971 (6) TMI 2 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8246</link>
      <description>Section 35(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 could be invoked to rectify the assessment and redetermine a partner&#039;s share income after the firm&#039;s status as a registered firm had been upheld by the High Court and the Tribunal. The taxpayer, having pursued that registered-firm status, could not resist the consequential rectification on the footing of the earlier assessment position. The objection that no fresh assessment order had been made on the registered firm was not supported by the affidavit, was raised for the first time at the hearing, and was unsupported by evidence rebutting the presumption that official acts are regularly and lawfully performed. The rectification was treated as valid and within jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8246</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>