<?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 5 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8602</link>
    <description>A mere substitution of a page in a partnership deed did not by itself defeat registration under the Income-tax Act, 1961, where the firm had commenced business during the accounting year and the registration application was filed within that year. The Tribunal&#039;s accepted evidence showed that the substituted page formed part of the instrument during the relevant period, and there was no material that accounts had been closed earlier or that the alteration affected the genuineness of the firm. The presumption also supported compliance with the requirement to accompany the application with the instrument and copy. Registration was therefore held to be admissible and rejection could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 10:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=47645" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (6) TMI 5 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8602</link>
      <description>A mere substitution of a page in a partnership deed did not by itself defeat registration under the Income-tax Act, 1961, where the firm had commenced business during the accounting year and the registration application was filed within that year. The Tribunal&#039;s accepted evidence showed that the substituted page formed part of the instrument during the relevant period, and there was no material that accounts had been closed earlier or that the alteration affected the genuineness of the firm. The presumption also supported compliance with the requirement to accompany the application with the instrument and copy. Registration was therefore held to be admissible and rejection could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8602</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>