<?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>1987 (3) TMI 40 - ANDHRA PRADESH High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25396</link>
    <description>Interest credited to the capital account of a minor admitted to the benefits of a partnership firm was held includible in the assessee&#039;s income under section 64(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Andhra Pradesh HC held that the 1976 amendment did not make any material difference to the scope of the provision, which continued to require clubbing of income arising directly or indirectly to a minor child from such admission. The Tribunal&#039;s finding that the credit was not shown to be a loan or deposit, and that the income arose because of the minor&#039;s admission to the firm&#039;s benefits, was accepted as justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 13:13:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=64394" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (3) TMI 40 - ANDHRA PRADESH High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25396</link>
      <description>Interest credited to the capital account of a minor admitted to the benefits of a partnership firm was held includible in the assessee&#039;s income under section 64(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Andhra Pradesh HC held that the 1976 amendment did not make any material difference to the scope of the provision, which continued to require clubbing of income arising directly or indirectly to a minor child from such admission. The Tribunal&#039;s finding that the credit was not shown to be a loan or deposit, and that the income arose because of the minor&#039;s admission to the firm&#039;s benefits, was accepted as justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25396</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>