<?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>1971 (9) TMI 61 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39957</link>
    <description>A partition of Hindu undivided family property does not amount to a transfer in the strict legal sense for gift-tax purposes because, before partition, a coparcener has no definite ascertainable share in the joint property. The expressions in section 2(xxiv) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958, such as disposition, conveyance, assignment, settlement, delivery, payment, or other alienation, contemplate modes of transfer and do not naturally include partition. Clause (d) of section 2(xxiv) also does not apply, since partition among coparceners does not involve diminution of an identifiable share already owned by one coparcener in favour of another. The partition therefore was not a taxable gift or transfer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Sep 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2015 16:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=78503" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1971 (9) TMI 61 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39957</link>
      <description>A partition of Hindu undivided family property does not amount to a transfer in the strict legal sense for gift-tax purposes because, before partition, a coparcener has no definite ascertainable share in the joint property. The expressions in section 2(xxiv) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958, such as disposition, conveyance, assignment, settlement, delivery, payment, or other alienation, contemplate modes of transfer and do not naturally include partition. Clause (d) of section 2(xxiv) also does not apply, since partition among coparceners does not involve diminution of an identifiable share already owned by one coparcener in favour of another. The partition therefore was not a taxable gift or transfer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Sep 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39957</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>