<?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>1979 (5) TMI 21 - GAUHATI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37482</link>
    <description>The High Court of GAUHATI determined that the shares of members in an association of persons (AOP) were definite and ascertainable for income tax purposes. The Tribunal&#039;s findings regarding the clarity of shares were upheld, emphasizing factual evidence. The High Court directed the Tribunal to refer the legal question of interpreting partnership deed clauses and relevant statutory provisions for consideration. The department&#039;s second question was deemed encompassed within the first and not pursued. As a result, the applications were allowed, rules made absolute, and each party was to bear its own costs. Judge D. PATHAK concurred with the decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 May 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:14:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=76028" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (5) TMI 21 - GAUHATI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37482</link>
      <description>The High Court of GAUHATI determined that the shares of members in an association of persons (AOP) were definite and ascertainable for income tax purposes. The Tribunal&#039;s findings regarding the clarity of shares were upheld, emphasizing factual evidence. The High Court directed the Tribunal to refer the legal question of interpreting partnership deed clauses and relevant statutory provisions for consideration. The department&#039;s second question was deemed encompassed within the first and not pursued. As a result, the applications were allowed, rules made absolute, and each party was to bear its own costs. Judge D. PATHAK concurred with the decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 May 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37482</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>