<?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>Consortium Member&#039;s Claim of Non-Membership in AOP Undermined by Revenue Transfer Agreement, Despite 0% Tax Share.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=74011</link>
    <description>Association of persons (AOP) - Consortium - Appellant No.1 is a member of AOP or not - There is no force in the contention of Appellant No.1 that due to absence of right to any profits of the consortium, the Appellant No.1 cannot be deemed to be a member of the AOP. Indeed, in the return filed, the share of Appellant No.1 is shown to be 0%. Indeed in the addendum, there is division of work, but, that is only a mode of completing the ‘Project’. As far as sharing of profits is concerned Deepali Designs, who is Appellant No.1 before us, had agreed by virtue of sub-clause (3) of Clause 2 of the addendum, to forego 23% of its gross revenue to PHKL. - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jan 2024 10:00:32 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Jan 2024 21:40:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=739235" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Consortium Member&#039;s Claim of Non-Membership in AOP Undermined by Revenue Transfer Agreement, Despite 0% Tax Share.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=74011</link>
      <description>Association of persons (AOP) - Consortium - Appellant No.1 is a member of AOP or not - There is no force in the contention of Appellant No.1 that due to absence of right to any profits of the consortium, the Appellant No.1 cannot be deemed to be a member of the AOP. Indeed, in the return filed, the share of Appellant No.1 is shown to be 0%. Indeed in the addendum, there is division of work, but, that is only a mode of completing the ‘Project’. As far as sharing of profits is concerned Deepali Designs, who is Appellant No.1 before us, had agreed by virtue of sub-clause (3) of Clause 2 of the addendum, to forego 23% of its gross revenue to PHKL. - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jan 2024 10:00:32 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=74011</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>