<?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>1998 (8) TMI 41 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15913</link>
    <description>The High Court directed the Tribunal to remand both issues to the Assessing Officer for further examination. The Assessing Officer must determine if a follow-up agreement specifying the profit/loss sharing ratio existed (pertaining to Section 13(b) of the Partnership Act) and demonstrate how treating the firm as registered under Section 183(b) would benefit the Revenue. The common question for the assessment years 1982-83 and 1986-87 was returned unanswered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Aug 2009 17:37:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54913" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (8) TMI 41 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15913</link>
      <description>The High Court directed the Tribunal to remand both issues to the Assessing Officer for further examination. The Assessing Officer must determine if a follow-up agreement specifying the profit/loss sharing ratio existed (pertaining to Section 13(b) of the Partnership Act) and demonstrate how treating the firm as registered under Section 183(b) would benefit the Revenue. The common question for the assessment years 1982-83 and 1986-87 was returned unanswered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15913</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>