<?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>1981 (1) TMI 133 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61143</link>
    <description>The Tribunal concluded that the CIT&#039;s order under Section 263 of the IT Act was invalid as it did not clearly establish the criteria for invoking the section. It was held that the firm&#039;s activities constituted a profession, not a business, and therefore, Section 64(1)(i) was not applicable to the income distribution between partners. The Tribunal allowed the appeals, canceling the CIT&#039;s order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 31 Jan 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2011 11:12:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=99590" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (1) TMI 133 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61143</link>
      <description>The Tribunal concluded that the CIT&#039;s order under Section 263 of the IT Act was invalid as it did not clearly establish the criteria for invoking the section. It was held that the firm&#039;s activities constituted a profession, not a business, and therefore, Section 64(1)(i) was not applicable to the income distribution between partners. The Tribunal allowed the appeals, canceling the CIT&#039;s order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 31 Jan 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61143</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>