<?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>1957 (1) TMI 52 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276013</link>
    <description>Where a Hindu undivided family ceased to exist before penalty proceedings were initiated, the statutory machinery that treats the family as the assessee and permits joint and several assessment cannot be used to impose a penalty on the former family under the general penalty provision. Because the defined assessee entity had been disrupted by partition and no provision expressly preserved penal liability post cessation, imposition of penalty on individual erstwhile members under that scheme is invalid in law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2018 13:22:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=539548" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1957 (1) TMI 52 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276013</link>
      <description>Where a Hindu undivided family ceased to exist before penalty proceedings were initiated, the statutory machinery that treats the family as the assessee and permits joint and several assessment cannot be used to impose a penalty on the former family under the general penalty provision. Because the defined assessee entity had been disrupted by partition and no provision expressly preserved penal liability post cessation, imposition of penalty on individual erstwhile members under that scheme is invalid in law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276013</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>