<?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>1992 (1) TMI 87 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21851</link>
    <description>A partnership firm is not invalid merely because one partner signs or acts in a dual capacity, where the CBDT has issued a circular stating that such execution does not affect the firm&#039;s constitution. The High Court held that income-tax authorities are bound by binding CBDT circulars and cannot disregard them while considering registration issues. On that basis, the proposed cancellation of the firm&#039;s registration could not be sustained, and the notice was quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 12:03:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=60850" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (1) TMI 87 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21851</link>
      <description>A partnership firm is not invalid merely because one partner signs or acts in a dual capacity, where the CBDT has issued a circular stating that such execution does not affect the firm&#039;s constitution. The High Court held that income-tax authorities are bound by binding CBDT circulars and cannot disregard them while considering registration issues. On that basis, the proposed cancellation of the firm&#039;s registration could not be sustained, and the notice was quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21851</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>