<?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>2003 (7) TMI 22 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11105</link>
    <description>In estate duty analysis of a deceased partner&#039;s interest, the partnership deed governed distribution of accumulated profits, displacing the default equal-sharing rule, so only the specifically declared Rs. 9,000 share was treated as passing on death. Undeclared profits for the accounting year up to death had not accrued and were not property passing on death. Goodwill could still pass as a commercial asset despite a deed clause excluding goodwill claims, and its valuation, including a one-year multiplier, was accepted as a factual determination. A refund claim determined only after death was contingent and not an enforceable right at the date of death, so it was not property passing on death.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=50124" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (7) TMI 22 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11105</link>
      <description>In estate duty analysis of a deceased partner&#039;s interest, the partnership deed governed distribution of accumulated profits, displacing the default equal-sharing rule, so only the specifically declared Rs. 9,000 share was treated as passing on death. Undeclared profits for the accounting year up to death had not accrued and were not property passing on death. Goodwill could still pass as a commercial asset despite a deed clause excluding goodwill claims, and its valuation, including a one-year multiplier, was accepted as a factual determination. A refund claim determined only after death was contingent and not an enforceable right at the date of death, so it was not property passing on death.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11105</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>