<?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>1963 (7) TMI 98 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276389</link>
    <description>Remuneration received by a karta from a partnership firm was held includible in the Hindu undivided family&#039;s income where the family funds supplied the capital for the partnership interest. The decisive factor was the direct nexus between the joint family funds and the right to receive the remuneration: the karta did not act in any separate individual capacity, and the receipt arose from his position as partner acquired through family assets. Authorities treating similar receipts as personal income were distinguished because they lacked that family-fund connection. The amount was therefore attributable to the family and assessable in its hands.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jul 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2018 17:17:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=541173" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1963 (7) TMI 98 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276389</link>
      <description>Remuneration received by a karta from a partnership firm was held includible in the Hindu undivided family&#039;s income where the family funds supplied the capital for the partnership interest. The decisive factor was the direct nexus between the joint family funds and the right to receive the remuneration: the karta did not act in any separate individual capacity, and the receipt arose from his position as partner acquired through family assets. Authorities treating similar receipts as personal income were distinguished because they lacked that family-fund connection. The amount was therefore attributable to the family and assessable in its hands.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jul 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276389</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>