<?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>2008 (8) TMI 2 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30148</link>
    <description>A joint venture formed by three entities for a common consultancy project was treated as an association of persons because the contract was entered into with the venture as a unit, the members were jointly and severally liable to the client, and the work was organised under a coordinated scheme of cooperation. The AAR found common purpose, common action, and unified management directed towards earning income from the project. Separate billing, separate bank accounts, and internal allocation of remuneration did not negate AOP status, and the authorities cited by the applicant were distinguished. The venture was therefore assessed as an association of persons.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Jul 2013 11:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68806" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 2 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30148</link>
      <description>A joint venture formed by three entities for a common consultancy project was treated as an association of persons because the contract was entered into with the venture as a unit, the members were jointly and severally liable to the client, and the work was organised under a coordinated scheme of cooperation. The AAR found common purpose, common action, and unified management directed towards earning income from the project. Separate billing, separate bank accounts, and internal allocation of remuneration did not negate AOP status, and the authorities cited by the applicant were distinguished. The venture was therefore assessed as an association of persons.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30148</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>