Just a moment...

Top
Help
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

1987 (7) TMI 35

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....'body of individuals' ?" One Mr. Gattupalli was carrying on tobacco business. He exported tobacco to foreign countries, in consideration whereof some import entitlements were granted to him. Sri Gattupalli died on August 31, 1971. He left behind a will under which he bequeathed all his movable and immovable properties to his wife and four minor sons to be enjoyed by them equally. Till his death he was being assessed in the status of an individual. Soon after his death, i.e., in the next month, a deed of partition was executed, whereunder the widow divided all the movable and immovable properties left by her deceased husband into five shares, between herself and her four minor sons. The partition deed is dated September 15, 1971. One of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as of the view that import quota rights were only one of the properties left behind by Sri A. Gattupalli and that this property along with other properties left by the deceased was partitioned between the mother and four sons under a deed of partition. It also held that no business was carried on as such by the said body of individuals. The Tribunal referred to the fact that the Government rejected the request of Mrs. Gattupalli for issuance of separate entitlements in the names of herself and her four sons, but held that the said rejection by the Government has no relevance to the question of status. It held that, inasmuch as the deed of partition clearly stated that each of the co-owners was entitled to a 1/5th share in the quota rights l....