Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act 1932 section 17 rights and duties of partners Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat mumbai Page 1 of about 9 results (0.067 seconds)

Jun 12 2008 (TRI)

Minnow Trading Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

..... the capital subscribed by them, when there are no profits with the partnership firms as per the provisions of section 13(c) of the indian partnership act, 1932 we find that the provisions of section 13(c) of the indian partnership act, 1932 provides- subject to contract between the partners where a partner is entitled to interest on the capital subscribed by him, such interest ..... we find that there being no clause in the partnership deed of the partnership firms providing payment of interest to the partners regardless of profits to the firms, we hold that no interest is payable by the partnership firms to its partners and accordingly no right to receive interest from the partnership firms has accrued to the assessee company and therefore, ..... the notional addition on account of accrued interest from the partnership firms is not sustainable and the addition made is deleted and ..... right to receive interest has accrued to the assessee from the partnership firms. she submitted that the partnership firms are very much in business of development of land as they have incurred certain expenses on land development, which were capitalized by them as per their statement of accounts filed with the department.she contended that the provisions of section 13(c) of the indian partnership act, 1932 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 1989 (TRI)

Wealth-tax Officer Vs. Mrs. Bakhtawar B. Chenoy

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1990)32ITD739(Mum.)

..... have heard the parties and considered their rival submissions.the partnership, as defined in section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, is the relation between the persons, who have agreed to share the profits and losses of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all. the mutual rights and duties of the partners of a firm may be determined by contract between them and ..... such contract, as per section 11 of the indian partnership act, may be expressed or ..... may be implied by a course of dealings. such contract may also be varied by consent of all the parties, which may be expressed or may be implied by a course of dealings. section 11 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 1990 (TRI)

Central Cloth Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1991)37ITD1(Mum.)

..... meets the requirements of law in terms of the definitions in the income-tax act, 1961 and the indian partnership act, 1932 vis-a-vis the definitions of 'firm', 'partners' and 'partnership'. the stand of the revenue is that charge of tax, qua the assessees have to be under section 167a inasmuch as shares of the constituents are unknown and the assessee is an ..... and discretion to modify, alter or vary the terms and conditions of this partnership deed in any manner whatsoever they ..... be entitled to any profits. the hon'ble mysore high court held that the relationship amounted to a partnership/firm and it was registrable under section 26a of the act with the reasoning that the fact that no partner could, as of right, draw the profits during the first ten years did not mean that there was no agreement to share ..... or as to any act, deed or commission of any partner as to any other partner under these presents shall be referred to arbitration under the provisions of indian arbitration act then in force. 17. anything not provided herein touching the partnership shall be decided by mutual consent of all the partners. 18. notwithstanding anything stated or provided herein the partners shall have full powers .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 20 1985 (TRI)

D.N. Dastur and Co. Vs. Eleventh Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1986)16ITD499(Mum.)

..... a partner, but only an employee and, therefore, no firm existed which could be said to be a genuine firm, and, therefore, registration has been rightly cancelled.5. we have heard the parties. the short issue in the instant case before us is whether there is a firm which could be said to be by an agreement under the indian partnership act, 1932. 'partnership' as defined by section ..... 4 of the indian partnership act, means the relationship between persons who have agreed to share the ..... share the profits or the losses.clauses 8 to 10 only provide an inter se arrangement amongst the partners also delineating the entitlements of the partners in regard to the assets, etc., their rights, duties, etc., in the firm's conduct. he then referred to page 37, which is the application made to the institute of chartered accountants of india, wherein it has been ..... assessee with the ito, a-iv ward. the ito who had granted the registration, which assessment order is at page 17 of the paper book clearly indicates that he had examined both the form no 11 as well as the partnership deed which he had found them to be in order. therefore, the form on which reliance has been placed by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 31 1984 (TRI)

D.M. Ghia Vs. Second Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1984)10ITD163(Mum.)

..... represent borrowals.14. shri doshi's answer to this point is that if there had been drawings by a partner beyond the credits, it has to be treated as borrowals only. he relies on section 11 of the indian partnership act, 1932 and clause 9 of the partnership deed. now the issue is not, for the present, whether this represents borrowal or not. the issue is : from ..... cited, therefore, need not be considered in detail.24. shri doshi has also made a reference to section 11 of the partnership act. this section merely states that the partners may determine their rights and duties for contract. this is also not very relevant. neither is clause 9 of the partnership deed very relevant. we also reject the submission made by him that it is not open for ..... in the firm has been treated somewhat like a current account. his income receipts are credited in that account. so too his drawings and payment of taxes. the partnership deed did not stipulate that partners would be debited with interest.nevertheless, interest has been charged on the debit balances. the accounting years are the financial years. for the year ending 31-3 ..... the tax payments made by the assessee have not come from the funds of the firm.17. we will now consider the legal aspect, i.e., whether the overdrawings of a partner from the books of the firm would amount to borrowal within the meaning of section 80v. we may make it clear at this stage itself that this question does not arise .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 1986 (TRI)

L.M.S. Tool Room Vs. First Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1986)16ITD643(Mum.)

..... is mentioned as a party of the first part in the deed of partnership) is described in the opening portion of the said partnership deed as follows : shri narendra l. shah (acting as partner) for and on behalf of indian textile accessories co., the existing partnership concern registered under the indian partnership act, 1932.shri niranjan b. shah and shri surendra l. shah are the persons who have signed the ..... cannot be said that the other partners of indian textile accessories co. cannot enforce their rights against the other partners of the assessee-firm and that the other partners of the assessee-firm cannot enforce their rights against the other partners of indian textile accessories co. this is because indian textile accessories co. has been treated in clause 7 of the partnership deed as a partner having 25 per cent share ..... the deed had been signed by five individuals, viz., by the individual partner, the karta of the joint family, and by one partner each of the three firms. this deed of partnership was sought to be registered under section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922, the application being signed by the same five individuals. the supreme court held that no question could arise of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 11 2000 (TRI)

Smruti Trading Company Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

..... his individual capacity. we cannot throw out notions of the partnership law even while considering a question arising under the it act, because s. 2(23) of the it act says that the expressions "firm", "partner" and "partnership" shall have the meanings respectively assigned to them in the indian partnership act, 1932, with the only exception that the expression "partner" would also include a minor admitted to the benefits of ..... the partnership. thus, if under the partnership law, an huf as such cannot ..... contrary to the ruling of the supreme court in cit vs. muralidhar jhawar (1966) 60 itr 95 (sc). it was therefore submitted that even on merits, the salary was rightly allowed as deduction.11. on the other hand, the learned senior departmental representative strongly relied on the language of expln. 4 to s. 40(b) and submitted that the ..... joint family was resolved, we are, therefore, clearly of the opinion that there is no such proposition of law as is laid down by the cit.17. the fact that the working partner derived a higher profit share as well as salary and thus became entitled to a much larger share of the profits of the firm than the other .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 11 1983 (TRI)

Ramanlal I. Joshi Vs. Ninth Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1983)4ITD364(Mum.)

..... as including 'trade, commerce or manufacture'. this definition of business does not specifically include profession but it is an inclusive definition.section 2(23) defines a 'partnership' as having the same meaning as assigned to it under the indian partnership act, 1932. section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932 defines a firm to be a relationship between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on ..... the partners ca n act on behalf of all of them. the idea that all the members of a professional firm should be equally qualified ..... valid partnership as per section 4 of the partnership act was created by the aforesaid deed. by virtue of suction 2(23) of the income-tax act, it also becomes a valid firm for the purpose of income-tax act. hence, we do not see any infirmity or illegality in the partnership-firm evidenced by the deed dated 14-6-1976. the requirement that all the partners ..... be equally qualified technically to carry on the business or profession of the firm unless it is so required under any other act. his point was that under section 4 of the partnership act, 1932, it is not necessary that each and every partner should be technically qualified to carry on the business or profession of the firm. the reason is that any one of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 02 1991 (TRI)

Empire Estate Vs. Third Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1992)41ITD23(Mum.)

..... more than a compendious description of the partners carrying on the business. but for taxing purposes 'a partnership firm' is treated as an entirely distinct, from the persons who constitute the 'firm'. section 2(23) gives the same meaning to the expressions "firm", "partner" and "partnership" as are respectively assigned to them in the indian partnership act, 1932. section 2(31) lays down that a "person ..... " includes a firm also. it follows that under the income-tax act, a firm is treated as a distinct and separate entity, ..... different from the partners constituting it.13. where a firm is dissolved either ..... jurisdiction over the old firm cannot be elongated so as to include within its sweep the case of the new firm also.17. section 124(5)(6), as it stood, prior to amendment (by direct tax laws (amendment) act, 1987 with effect from 1-4-1988) is reproduced hereunder : (5) no person shall be entitled to call in question .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 23 2003 (TRI)

Mafatlal Holdings Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)85TTJ(Mum.)821

..... the registrar of firms. in the case of dulichand laxminarayan v. cit (1956) 29 itr 535 (sc), the hon'ble supreme court held that section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, clearly requires the presence of three elements to constitute a firm namely (i) that there must be an agreement entered into by two or more persons ..... was not capital contribution as the same has been shown under the heading "loans and advances". the learned departmental representative also made reference to p. 17 of the ao's order and argued that m/s arvi associates had stated that they had purchased 1,04,16,530 equity shares of nocil ..... assessee had shown net profit at rs. 88,39,173, the dividend income at rs. 71,19,180 and profit on sale of investments of rs. 17,06,529. thus, it makes abundantly clear that the assessee was carrying on the business during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration, otherwise ..... term investments of rs. 71,19,180 which has been taxed as income from other sources and profit on sale of long-term investments of rs. 17,06,579 which has been taxed as capital gains.thus, according to the ao, this income does not include any business income or operational income. ..... learned counsel has also rightly pointed out that there is no requirement under the law that in case of transfer of an asset by a partner to the firm in which he is a partner, the amount of sale consideration has got to be credited to his capital account. sub-section (3) of section 45 provides when a .....

Tag this Judgment!


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