<?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>1951 (12) TMI 17 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277016</link>
    <description>Income from a new partnership venture was treated as Hindu undivided family income where the Tribunal found that the venture was financed entirely from joint family funds, the partners were family members representing the two family branches, no personal funds were invested, and goods were supplied from the family business without commission. On those factual findings, the members who executed the partnership were regarded as acting for the family rather than in their individual capacities, and the profits were attributed to the family. The question of any personal right to represent the family was treated as immaterial in light of the proven use of joint family resources.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2018 10:59:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=543145" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1951 (12) TMI 17 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277016</link>
      <description>Income from a new partnership venture was treated as Hindu undivided family income where the Tribunal found that the venture was financed entirely from joint family funds, the partners were family members representing the two family branches, no personal funds were invested, and goods were supplied from the family business without commission. On those factual findings, the members who executed the partnership were regarded as acting for the family rather than in their individual capacities, and the profits were attributed to the family. The question of any personal right to represent the family was treated as immaterial in light of the proven use of joint family resources.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277016</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>