<?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>1986 (1) TMI 53 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26561</link>
    <description>Under the Karnataka Tax on Professions, Trades, Callings and Employments Act, 1976, profession tax is levied on each person engaged in a profession, and the statutory definition of &quot;person&quot; includes a firm and other entities. The Court treated a firm and its partners as distinct taxable persons, holding that assessment of the firm does not exempt an individual partner who independently carries on the same profession. Income-tax authorities were considered inapposite, while authority under the Punjab Municipal Act supported individual taxation of partners where the statute taxes persons practising a profession. The partner was therefore liable to profession tax separately from the firm, and the challenge to the levy failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jan 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 10:35:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=65559" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (1) TMI 53 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26561</link>
      <description>Under the Karnataka Tax on Professions, Trades, Callings and Employments Act, 1976, profession tax is levied on each person engaged in a profession, and the statutory definition of &quot;person&quot; includes a firm and other entities. The Court treated a firm and its partners as distinct taxable persons, holding that assessment of the firm does not exempt an individual partner who independently carries on the same profession. Income-tax authorities were considered inapposite, while authority under the Punjab Municipal Act supported individual taxation of partners where the statute taxes persons practising a profession. The partner was therefore liable to profession tax separately from the firm, and the challenge to the levy failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jan 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26561</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>