<?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>1983 (8) TMI 36 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27910</link>
    <description>The High Court affirmed the ITAT&#039;s decision that the status of the assessee should be assessed as &quot;individuals&quot; for capital gains purposes, rejecting the Revenue&#039;s argument to maintain the status as a &quot;body of individuals.&quot; The Court did not address the issue of whether the HUF had ceased to exist as it was not pursued by the Revenue. The decision was unanimous without separate opinions from the judges.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 17:20:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=66908" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (8) TMI 36 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27910</link>
      <description>The High Court affirmed the ITAT&#039;s decision that the status of the assessee should be assessed as &quot;individuals&quot; for capital gains purposes, rejecting the Revenue&#039;s argument to maintain the status as a &quot;body of individuals.&quot; The Court did not address the issue of whether the HUF had ceased to exist as it was not pursued by the Revenue. The decision was unanimous without separate opinions from the judges.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27910</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>