Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2003(4)ALLMR77; 2003(6)BomCR594; 2004(1)MhLj71
..... petitions, facts in the first petition (writ petition no. 3433 of 2003) may briefly be stated.6. the petitioner is a partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act, 1932. it is a member of the federation of associations of maharashtra (fam). it is engaged in business of trading in jaggery since ..... in eight weeks. rule on interim relief returnable in eight weeks. in the meantime respondents will not take any coercive action under the act.parties to act on copy of this order duly authenticated.'20. from the above order, it is clear that on writ petition, rule was issued, ..... by the learned assistant government pleader on behalf of the authorities that coercive actions were being taken for violation of the provisions of the act and not for not possessing the licences as required by the amended provisions, which were made subject-matter of writ petition. according to the ..... hearing was afforded, and the action was taken in a high-handed manner. the petitioner has, therefore, approached this court for appropriate reliefs.8. the petitioner has also stated that it has obtained all licences necessary for doing business. the details of licences possessed by the petitioner have ..... action under the provisions of bombay prohibition act'. the court, however, has not ranted stay against the amendment act of 2000, which had been brought into force from november 16, 2001. in the amendment act, definition of 'molasses' has been amended.30. in paragraph 8, the deponent stated:-'i say that .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC2021; 47CompCas666(SC); (1977)4SCC9; 1SCR218; 1977(9)LC499(SC)
..... court and can only wound up by the court. admittedly this is not a case of volume winding up or winding up subject to the supervision of the chapter vi of the indian partnership act, 1932 also contains persons for the dissolution of a firm and its winding up on dissolution the argument for the appellants is that the special provisions of x of the ..... companies act exclude the operation of the general lav tained in the partnership act in the matter of winding up of having more than seven persons and as the civil judge tryer ..... not relevant for the present purpose. it is clear that provisions for winding up of the affairs of a firm which vi of the indian partnership act contains besides provision-, dissolution of partnership are left untouched by section 59 companies a the cases cited in support of the respective contentions of the parties are not really on the point under consideration except the ..... to entertain some of the claims made in the suit, because section 590 of the companies act makes it clear that part x of the does not affect the operation of the indian partnership act. s 590 states:5. saving and construction of enactments conferring power to w partnership, association or company in certain cases.nothing in this part shall affect the operation of ar .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2005SC3434; 2005(4)AWC3869N(SC); IV(2005)BC13(SC); 2006(1)BomCR760; 2005(4)CTC408; [2006(2)JCR155(SC)]; JT2005(8)SC58; 2005(4)KLT264(SC); (2005)7SCC308
..... to appear;provided that nothing in this sub-rule shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affected the provisions of section 30 of the indian partnership act 1932 (9 of 1932).(2) where the decree-holder claims to be entitled to cause the decree to be executed against any person other than such a ..... present context which are reproduced hereunder:'section 24- effect of notice to the acting partner - notice to the partner who habitually acts in the business of the firm of any matter relating to the ..... other. the partner is always liable for partnership debt unless there is implied or express restriction. in the instant case, notice was duly served on smt. dhanwanti devi and her husband at house no. 80b , block sri ganganagar. sections 24 & 25 of the indian partnership act, 1932 can be usefully referred to in the ..... to the second question. in paragraph 18, r.c. lahoti, j. observed as under:'the high court has relied on section 25 of the partnership act, 1932 for the purpose of holding the partners as individuals liable to meet the tax liability of the firm. section 25 provides that every partner is liable ..... any one or more of the partners. each partner shall be liable as if the debt of the firm has been incurred on his personal liability. 8. the judgment in the case of dena bank v. bhikhabhai prabhudas parekh & co. and ors., : 247itr165(sc) can be beneficially referred to .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : (2007)210CTR(AP)529; 290ITR511(AP)
..... transfer much less gift in the said transaction.4. the learned commissioner (cgt) being of the view that under the partnership act, minors cannot be taken as partners, examined the matter in the light of sections 30 and 32 of the indian partnership act, 1932, and held that the case law applicable to the retirement of partners is not applicable to the minor withdrawing from the ..... , and resulted in consequent increase in the said value in the hands of the retiring partner. even in that view of the matter, the transaction in question is a transfer'.8. the answer to the questions, as posed above, is thus dependent upon the correctness of the conclusions arrived at by the learned commissioner (cgt) as upheld by the learned income ..... with respect to the assets of the firm.12. it is by now well-settled that the partnership firm under the indian partnership act, 1932, is not a distinct legal entity apart from the partners constituting it. a firm has no separate rights of its own in the partnership assets. in law, any reference to the firm's property or firm's assets is in substance ..... to partners is not applicable to the case of a minor withdrawing from the benefits of partnership. let us, therefore, consider the correctness of the said conclusions. section 30 of the indian partnership act, 1932, to the extent relevant, is extracted hereunder:30. minors admitted to the benefits of partnership.--(1) a person who is a minor according to the law to which he is subject .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Guwahati
..... partner in a firm in his individual capacity as well as a karta of the hindu undivided family. it is aware of the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932. it has clearly provided that where the karta is a partner in a firm and it is found as a matter of fact that he ..... revenue cannot be treated as a partner in a firm. the rights and obligations of the revenue are regulated not by the contract of partnership but by the provisions of the act. it thus falls in the category of 'third parties' and a partner, who is a karta of a hindu undivided family, functions ..... matter of levy and collection of income-tax on a partner of a firm can be regulated by the terms of the contract of partnership ; (3) whether the income-tax act recognises the dual capacity of a partner for the purpose of assessment; and (4) whether the income from a firm can be ..... emerges is clear. an individual, who is a partner in a representative capacity as karta of a hindu undivided family occupies a dual position--qua the partnership, he functions in his personal capacity ; qua the third parties, he functions in his representative capacity.10 the question that arises for consideration is, while ..... of persons ; he may be a benamidar for another. in all such cases he occupies a dual position. qua the partnership, he functions in his personal capacity ; qua the third parties, in his representative capacity.'8. learned counsel also relies on the decision of the allahabad high court in madho prasad v. cit, : 112itr492 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2001(2)BomCR657; (2001)2BOMLR145; (2001)1CompLJ415(Bom)
..... .5. there is no doubt about the fact that in the case of a partnership registered under the indian partnership act, 1932, the remedy for a dissolution of partnership is also provided in chapter vi of the act. the indian partnership act, 1932 provides for a dissolution of a partnership firm in section 39 and enunciates various modes of dissolution amongst them, in section 40 a dissolution by agreement, in section 41 ..... the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932 is not ousted by the provisions of part x of the companies act. 1956. equally, the existence of the remedy under the indian partnership act, 1932 to seek dissolution does not bar the remedy to apply for winding up under part x of the companies act, 1956 subject to the due fulfilment of the special requirements of that part.8. it may be ..... is no substance in this defence. the petitioner while terminating the licence by the notice dated 12.6.1999 required the respondent to take possession of the premises on 12.8.1999 against a refund of the security deposit. clauses 3 and 13 of the agreement of licence mandate that the amount of security deposit was to be refunded against ..... months' notice. which was required under the terms of the licence. the respondent was called upon to take vacant and peaceful possession of the licensed premises at site on 12.8.1999 against the simultaneous handing over of thesecurity deposit of rs. 1,60,00,000/-. the petitioner stated that if the security deposit was not handed over, they shall not .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Reported in : 200ITR366(Ker)
..... firm which would show how the profit or loss had been actually apportioned between the partners and also by taking recourse to section 13(b) of the indian partnership act, 1932. we, therefore, hold, with great respect to the learned judges, that the decisions in cit v. ithappiri and george : 88itr332(ker) ..... : 56itr219(sc) and parekh wadilal jivanbhai v. cit : 63itr485(sc) and also to the provisions under section 13(b) of the indian partnership act, 1932. ultimately, the bench came to the conclusion by applying the dictum laid down in n. t. patel's case : 42itr224(sc) that specification ..... partnership dated march 29, 1954, applied for registration under section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922, for the assessment year 1955-56. in the course of the assessment proceedings, it was detected that there was no specific provision in the deed for the division of profits and losses and the partners executed a supplemental ..... to be referred by the assessee for the year 1975-76. pursuant to the judgment of this court in the above original petition dated march 8, 1985, the commissioner of agricultural income-tax referred all the three questions in i.t.r. no. 40 of 1986. question no. 1 ..... document on september 17, 1955, purporting to rectify the error adding thereby a new clause to the deed specifying the shares in which the profit and loss of the partnership should be apportioned. it is clear from the statement .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Reported in : 200ITR161(Ker)
..... : 105itr144(ker) . a abdul rahim, travancore confectionery works v. cit : 110itr595(ker) . it is also well-established that (at page 49 of 120 itr) 'a partnership firm, under the indian partnership act, 1932, is not a distinct legal entity apart from the partners constituting it and equally in law the firm as such has no separate rights of its own in the ..... the transferor.8. having thus understood clause (iii) of the sub-section, we must now consider the question whether the clause is attracted when, as in the instant case, the transfer is effected by a firm in favour of the persons who are none other than the spouses of the individual partners constituting the firm.9. a firm under the indian partnership act, 1932, has ..... of the legislative endeavour to overtake and circumvent the taxpayers' attempt to reduce tax liability. normally, the total income of an individual alone is taxable under the act. but, in chapter v of the act, income of other persons is also included in the assessee's total income. one such income of other persons includible in the individual's total income is the ..... directly or indirectly to the spouse by such individual otherwise than for adequate consideration ...;'(emphasis supplied). 6. section 64 appears in chapter v which deals with 'income of other persons included in the assessee's total income'. the provisions of this chapter treat, for the purpose of assessment, the income of another person, in certain circumstances, as the income of the assessee .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Reported in : 223ITR68(Mad)
..... , 1971, or on or after that date) as may be specified in the declaration.' 17. section 2(23) of the act defines 'firm'. it runs thus : '2. (23) 'firm', 'partner' and 'partnership' have the meanings respectively assigned to them in the indian partnership act, 1932 (9 of 1932) ; but the expression 'partner' shall also include any person who, being a minor, has been admitted to the benefits ..... accused/first respondent in c. c. nos. 361 and 362 of 1987 on the file of the additional chief metropolitan magistrate (economic offences-i), madras-8 (criminal r. c. no. 415 of 1987) is a partnership firm carrying on the business of marketing quality eyewares and the second accused, who is its partner, has signed the firm's annual return in form ..... section, if a person fails to deduct or after deducting, fails to pay the tax as required by or under the provisions of sub-section (9) of section 80e or chapter xvii-b, he shall be punishable. it is seen above that the person responsible for paying in our case is the firm itself. therefore, for non-deduction of tax from ..... n. shah v. ito : 188itr376(mad) on august 27, 1990. undoubtedly, the decision in ramaswami moopanar (g.) v. e.s.l corporation,  l. w. (crl.) 414, dated august 8, 1990, and in particular the passage extracted by us, has not been brought to the notice of the learned judge at the time of hearing of the case reported in .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Reported in : 96ITR348(Ker)
..... . in matters wherein no specific mention is made hereunder, the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932, shall prevail with respect to the relationship between the partners and the firm and third parties.' 3. chapter iii of the indian partnership act, 1932 (for short ' the act ') deals with ' relations of partners to one another ' and chapter iv thereof deals with ' relations of partners to third parties '. though the ..... wording in clause 15 of the partnership deed is not very clear as to what are the provisions of the indian partnership act that are intended to be ..... we shall extract a paragraph from that judgment :' the question is not whether there is any rule of law discernible either from section 13(b) of the indian partnership act, 1932, or from any general principle from which it is possible to discern the proportion in which the losses should be shared but as to whether section 184 insists that ..... were to be and that in our opinion was requisite for registration of the partnership under section 26a of the act and as that was wanting, registration was rightly refused,'8. this court had occasion to consider whether in the absence of provision in the partnership deed regarding the proportion in which the losses are to be contributed by the .....Tag this Judgment!