<?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>1996 (2) TMI 55 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18189</link>
    <description>Section 256(2) reference jurisdiction is attracted where arguable questions of law arise from the facts found, including the effect of dissolution of a partnership firm on sales tax liability paid after dissolution and on the valuation of closing stock. A concession on a question of law does not bind a party at a later stage, and the Tribunal need not frame separate references for matters that are only facets of the principal questions already proposed. The text states that, on the facts, the issues required fuller examination on a proper statement of case, and the Revenue&#039;s proposed questions were directed to be referred to the High Court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:44:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=57189" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (2) TMI 55 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18189</link>
      <description>Section 256(2) reference jurisdiction is attracted where arguable questions of law arise from the facts found, including the effect of dissolution of a partnership firm on sales tax liability paid after dissolution and on the valuation of closing stock. A concession on a question of law does not bind a party at a later stage, and the Tribunal need not frame separate references for matters that are only facets of the principal questions already proposed. The text states that, on the facts, the issues required fuller examination on a proper statement of case, and the Revenue&#039;s proposed questions were directed to be referred to the High Court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18189</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>