<?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>2002 (12) TMI 33 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11530</link>
    <description>The court ruled in favor of the assessee and the Department in part. It held that capital gains should be assessed in the hands of the firm, not the individual partners. Income earned by AOPs-13 for a specific period was to be assessed in the hands of AOPs-13. The Vice-President&#039;s directions on capital gains computation were deemed erroneous.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=50544" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (12) TMI 33 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11530</link>
      <description>The court ruled in favor of the assessee and the Department in part. It held that capital gains should be assessed in the hands of the firm, not the individual partners. Income earned by AOPs-13 for a specific period was to be assessed in the hands of AOPs-13. The Vice-President&#039;s directions on capital gains computation were deemed erroneous.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11530</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>