<?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>1977 (11) TMI 35 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38090</link>
    <description>A dissolved firm could still be assessed for pre-dissolution income under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The Bombay HC applied its earlier binding authority, as later reaffirmed, to hold that dissolution and discontinuance of business did not by themselves invalidate income-tax or excess profits tax assessments made after dissolution. The contrary Gujarat view was noted but could not override the settled Bombay position. The assessments were therefore valid in law, and the issue was decided against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 05 Nov 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Apr 2010 11:12:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=76636" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1977 (11) TMI 35 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38090</link>
      <description>A dissolved firm could still be assessed for pre-dissolution income under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The Bombay HC applied its earlier binding authority, as later reaffirmed, to hold that dissolution and discontinuance of business did not by themselves invalidate income-tax or excess profits tax assessments made after dissolution. The contrary Gujarat view was noted but could not override the settled Bombay position. The assessments were therefore valid in law, and the issue was decided against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 05 Nov 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38090</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>