<?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>1984 (11) TMI 47 - PATNA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26986</link>
    <description>The Tribunal decided that the claim of development rebate for the assessment year 1962-63 should be carried forward for consideration in the firm&#039;s assessment for 1963-64, not allocated to partners in 1962-63. Additionally, the Tribunal upheld the Income-tax Officer&#039;s cancellation orders under section 154 for the assessment years 1962-63 and 1963-64, stating that the rebate could not be allocated to partners until it became part of the firm&#039;s income. The Tribunal&#039;s decisions were in line with relevant legal provisions and case law, ensuring the development rebate was handled correctly and not prematurely allocated.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 10:08:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=65984" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (11) TMI 47 - PATNA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26986</link>
      <description>The Tribunal decided that the claim of development rebate for the assessment year 1962-63 should be carried forward for consideration in the firm&#039;s assessment for 1963-64, not allocated to partners in 1962-63. Additionally, the Tribunal upheld the Income-tax Officer&#039;s cancellation orders under section 154 for the assessment years 1962-63 and 1963-64, stating that the rebate could not be allocated to partners until it became part of the firm&#039;s income. The Tribunal&#039;s decisions were in line with relevant legal provisions and case law, ensuring the development rebate was handled correctly and not prematurely allocated.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26986</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>