<?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>1972 (6) TMI 4 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8594</link>
    <description>Income from house property and business allotted to a coparcener on partition was treated, on the facts found, as belonging to the continuing Hindu undivided family comprising the assessee, his wife and minor daughters. A coparcener receiving partitioned property does not necessarily hold it as separate individual property where the family unit survives in law. On that footing, the reassessment proceeded on an erroneous assumption that the income was assessable in the assessee&#039;s individual status. The correct status was Hindu undivided family, so the individual assessments could not be sustained and had to be revised accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jun 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 May 2009 16:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=47637" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (6) TMI 4 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8594</link>
      <description>Income from house property and business allotted to a coparcener on partition was treated, on the facts found, as belonging to the continuing Hindu undivided family comprising the assessee, his wife and minor daughters. A coparcener receiving partitioned property does not necessarily hold it as separate individual property where the family unit survives in law. On that footing, the reassessment proceeded on an erroneous assumption that the income was assessable in the assessee&#039;s individual status. The correct status was Hindu undivided family, so the individual assessments could not be sustained and had to be revised accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jun 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8594</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>