<?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>1936 (12) TMI 33 - HIGH COURT OF LAHORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292466</link>
    <description>Section 25-A applies only to complete partition of a Hindu undivided family, while section 26(2) governs transfer of ownership of a business that is actually succeeded to by another person. The Court accepted that a family may continue for remaining assets even where separable businesses pass to a company, and held that the successor is assessable to the extent of the business taken over without any fresh notice in the absence of an express statutory requirement. Salary payments claimed as a deduction were disallowed because income is computed by reference to the position when earned, and a new ground first raised before the appellate authority was properly refused as outside the permitted stage.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 1936 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Dec 2020 09:40:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=631189" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1936 (12) TMI 33 - HIGH COURT OF LAHORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292466</link>
      <description>Section 25-A applies only to complete partition of a Hindu undivided family, while section 26(2) governs transfer of ownership of a business that is actually succeeded to by another person. The Court accepted that a family may continue for remaining assets even where separable businesses pass to a company, and held that the successor is assessable to the extent of the business taken over without any fresh notice in the absence of an express statutory requirement. Salary payments claimed as a deduction were disallowed because income is computed by reference to the position when earned, and a new ground first raised before the appellate authority was properly refused as outside the permitted stage.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 1936 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292466</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>