Skip to content


income-tax Commissioner, Delhi Vs. Messrs. Birdhi Chand Girdhari Lal. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On
Case NumberIncome-tax Reference No. 26 of 1952
Reported in[1955]28ITR280(P& H)
Appellantincome-tax Commissioner, Delhi
RespondentMessrs. Birdhi Chand Girdhari Lal.
Cases ReferredSimla and Messrs. Padam Parshad Rattan Chand of Delhi v. Commissioner of Income
Excerpt:
- sections 100-a [as inserted by act 22 of 2002], 110 & 104 & letters patent, 1865, clause 10: [dr. b.s. chauhan, cj, l. mohapatra & a.s. naidu, jj] letters patent appeal order of single judge of high court passed while deciding matters filed under order 43, rule1 of c.p.c., - held, after introduction of section 110a in the c.p.c., by 2002 amendment act, no letters patent appeal is maintainable against judgment/order/decree passed by a single judge of a high court. a right of appeal, even though a vested one, can be taken away by law. it is pertinent to note that section 100-a introduced by 2002 amendment of the code starts with a non obstante clause. the purpose of such clause is to give the enacting part of an overriding effect in the case of a conflict with laws mentioned with the.....khosla, j. - this matter is concluded by two division bench decisions of this court, kalsi mechanical works, nandpur v. commissioner of income-tax, simla and messrs. padam parshad rattan chand of delhi v. commissioner of income-tax. it has been held in both these cases that where an oral partnership is alleged to have come into existence and this oral partnership was followed by a partnership deed executed after the accounting period the partnership cannot be registered as having taken place before and during the accounting year. the partnership is not in such cases entitled to registration under section 26a.we accordingly answer the reference in these terms. the respondent will pay costs which we assess at rs. 150.kapur, j. - i agree.reference answered accordingly.
Judgment:

KHOSLA, J. - This matter is concluded by two Division Bench decisions of this Court, Kalsi Mechanical Works, Nandpur v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Simla and Messrs. Padam Parshad Rattan Chand of Delhi v. Commissioner of Income-tax. It has been held in both these cases that where an oral partnership is alleged to have come into existence and this oral partnership was followed by a partnership deed executed after the accounting period the partnership cannot be registered as having taken place before and during the accounting year. The partnership is not in such cases entitled to registration under section 26A.

We accordingly answer the reference in these terms. The respondent will pay costs which we assess at Rs. 150.

KAPUR, J. - I agree.

Reference answered accordingly.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //