<?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>1995 (1) TMI 38 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19224</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the validity of the reunion of a Hindu undivided family (HUF) between Vaiyapuri Chettiar and his son, Rajkumar, under Hindu law. The reunion, established by a deed dated October 1, 1979, was deemed valid, but the clause allowing the option to bring in only some properties was deleted. All properties of the previous joint family pre-partition were considered part of the reunited joint family. The Income-tax Officer was directed to assess income from all properties of the former joint family in the hands of the reunited HUF. The Tribunal&#039;s decision was affirmed, ruling in favor of the reunited HUF against the Department.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 16:56:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=58223" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (1) TMI 38 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19224</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the validity of the reunion of a Hindu undivided family (HUF) between Vaiyapuri Chettiar and his son, Rajkumar, under Hindu law. The reunion, established by a deed dated October 1, 1979, was deemed valid, but the clause allowing the option to bring in only some properties was deleted. All properties of the previous joint family pre-partition were considered part of the reunited joint family. The Income-tax Officer was directed to assess income from all properties of the former joint family in the hands of the reunited HUF. The Tribunal&#039;s decision was affirmed, ruling in favor of the reunited HUF against the Department.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19224</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>