https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55985 The Tribunal upheld the refusal of registration of the firm, finding that the newly constituted firm comprising five AOPs was a deliberate creation to avoid tax liabilities. The Tribunal agreed with the AO and CIT(A) that the trusts and AOPs were not genuine entities but subterfuges for tax avoidance, citing the Supreme Court's decision in McDowell & Co. Ltd. vs. CTO. The Tribunal distinguished the case from Banyan & Berry vs. CIT, concluding that the arrangement did not qualify as legitimate tax planning. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the refusal of firm registration. en-us Thu, 30 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:57:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55985 The Tribunal upheld the refusal of registration of the firm, finding that the newly constituted firm comprising five AOPs was a deliberate creation to avoid tax liabilities. The Tribunal agreed with the AO and CIT(A) that the trusts and AOPs were not genuine entities but subterfuges for tax avoidance, citing the Supreme Court's decision in McDowell & Co. Ltd. vs. CTO. The Tribunal distinguished the case from Banyan & Berry vs. CIT, concluding that the arrangement did not qualify as legitimate tax planning. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the refusal of firm registration. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 30 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55985