<?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>2001 (6) TMI 167 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60106</link>
    <description>Registration of a firm under the Income-tax Act depends on a genuine partnership evidenced by an instrument, specified profit shares, and compliance with the prescribed application requirements. Where the firm was in existence, operated in accordance with the deed, and the deceased partner&#039;s share was temporarily credited to a reserve fund pending a succession dispute, the temporary arrangement did not undermine registration. The absence of the legal heir&#039;s signature was treated as a procedural defect, not one going to the root of the firm&#039;s validity, because the heir had not been admitted as a partner de jure at the relevant time. On these facts, refusal or cancellation of registration was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Jan 2011 17:15:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=98555" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (6) TMI 167 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60106</link>
      <description>Registration of a firm under the Income-tax Act depends on a genuine partnership evidenced by an instrument, specified profit shares, and compliance with the prescribed application requirements. Where the firm was in existence, operated in accordance with the deed, and the deceased partner&#039;s share was temporarily credited to a reserve fund pending a succession dispute, the temporary arrangement did not undermine registration. The absence of the legal heir&#039;s signature was treated as a procedural defect, not one going to the root of the firm&#039;s validity, because the heir had not been admitted as a partner de jure at the relevant time. On these facts, refusal or cancellation of registration was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60106</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>