<?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>2003 (4) TMI 94 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40348</link>
    <description>A reconstitution of a partnership that reduced an existing partner&#039;s profit-sharing share and inducted a new partner did not, by itself, create a taxable gift under the Gift-tax Act. The incoming partner contributed capital and assumed partnership obligations for the common advantage of the firm, and the Revenue produced no material to show that the reallocation lacked adequate consideration. Mere decrease in one partner&#039;s share and increase in another&#039;s was insufficient to prove a gift. The Revenue bore the burden of establishing a transfer for less than adequate consideration, and that burden was not discharged.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=78889" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (4) TMI 94 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40348</link>
      <description>A reconstitution of a partnership that reduced an existing partner&#039;s profit-sharing share and inducted a new partner did not, by itself, create a taxable gift under the Gift-tax Act. The incoming partner contributed capital and assumed partnership obligations for the common advantage of the firm, and the Revenue produced no material to show that the reallocation lacked adequate consideration. Mere decrease in one partner&#039;s share and increase in another&#039;s was insufficient to prove a gift. The Revenue bore the burden of establishing a transfer for less than adequate consideration, and that burden was not discharged.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40348</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>