<?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>1999 (6) TMI 8 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15474</link>
    <description>A genuine reconstitution of a firm, with admission of a new partner who contributed capital and assumed future partnership liabilities and business duties, was treated as supported by consideration and not as a gift. The reduction in an existing partner&#039;s profit-sharing ratio, by itself, did not convert the reallocation of shares into a taxable gift. The allotment of a profit share to the minor, who also brought capital into the firm, likewise could not be treated as a gift of the shares previously held by the other partners. The separate claim based on exemption under section 5(1)(xiv) of the Gift-tax Act was not examined because it did not survive.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2009 17:47:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54474" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (6) TMI 8 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15474</link>
      <description>A genuine reconstitution of a firm, with admission of a new partner who contributed capital and assumed future partnership liabilities and business duties, was treated as supported by consideration and not as a gift. The reduction in an existing partner&#039;s profit-sharing ratio, by itself, did not convert the reallocation of shares into a taxable gift. The allotment of a profit share to the minor, who also brought capital into the firm, likewise could not be treated as a gift of the shares previously held by the other partners. The separate claim based on exemption under section 5(1)(xiv) of the Gift-tax Act was not examined because it did not survive.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15474</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>