<?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>1949 (12) TMI 34 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192833</link>
    <description>Under Hindu law, a father may partition joint family property among himself and his minor sons without their consent; an unequal allotment does not make the partition void, but leaves it voidable at the instance of the sons. For income-tax recognition under Section 25A, however, a mere severance of status is insufficient: the joint family property must be divided into definite portions. A division of some assets, such as businesses and certain immovable properties, while jewels and other movables remain undivided, does not satisfy that requirement. The partition was therefore not capable of recognition for income-tax purposes until all joint family assets were completely partitioned.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 1949 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jun 2017 18:01:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=474711" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1949 (12) TMI 34 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192833</link>
      <description>Under Hindu law, a father may partition joint family property among himself and his minor sons without their consent; an unequal allotment does not make the partition void, but leaves it voidable at the instance of the sons. For income-tax recognition under Section 25A, however, a mere severance of status is insufficient: the joint family property must be divided into definite portions. A division of some assets, such as businesses and certain immovable properties, while jewels and other movables remain undivided, does not satisfy that requirement. The partition was therefore not capable of recognition for income-tax purposes until all joint family assets were completely partitioned.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 1949 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192833</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>