<?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>1983 (7) TMI 89 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61262</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, ruling that the share income from the partnership firm should not be clubbed in the assessment of the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF). It was determined that the individual had the right to enter the partnership in an individual capacity, even without explicit mention in the partnership deed. The Tribunal also found the tax planning strategies employed by the assessee to be legal in this case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 10:16:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=99709" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (7) TMI 89 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61262</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, ruling that the share income from the partnership firm should not be clubbed in the assessment of the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF). It was determined that the individual had the right to enter the partnership in an individual capacity, even without explicit mention in the partnership deed. The Tribunal also found the tax planning strategies employed by the assessee to be legal in this case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61262</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>