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 Year: 2003 Page 1 of about 3 results (0.050 seconds)

May 23 2003 (TRI)

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Shri Debajit Bezbarua

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Decided on : May-23-2003

Reported in : (2004)89ITD387(Gau.)

..... competition as there is clear conflict of interests. section 16 of indian partnership act, 1932, seeks to remedy precisely this kind of mischief, because the partner is an agent of the firm and he has to safeguard the best interest of the firm. clause 11 of the partnership deed, section 16(b) of the indian partnership act and section 88 of indian trust act read together would show that the assessee is ..... the firm. 2) clause 11 of the partnership deed (supra), section 16(b) of the indian partnership act (annex-5, pp. 7 of paper-book dated 5 ..... business was supply of 'any commodities'. the respondent shut out any competition from the partnership firm, despite his full knowledge. this results in unfair competition, as there is clear conflict of interests. section 16 of the indian partnership act, 1932, seeks to remedy precisely this kind of mischief, because, partner is an agent of the firm and he has to safeguard the best interest of ..... in deleting the same and accordingly we find no error in the order of the cit(a) on this account. the ground taken by the revenue is, therefore, rejected.17. in the cross objection the assessee has merely supported the order of the cit(a) and in view of our above decision in the revenue's appeal the ground .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 2003 (TRI)

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Mahesh Investments

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT

Decided on : Feb-18-2003

Reported in : (2004)88ITD221(Bang.)

..... have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all. persons who have entered into partnership with one another are called individually 'partners' and collectively 'a firm ..... only from house property.section 2(b) of indian partnership act, 1932 defines business. it is an inclusive definition as in the case of indian income-tax act. section 2(b) of the indian partnership act reads as follows: 2. in this act, unless there is anything repugnant in this subject or context.section 2(13) of the income-tax act, 1961 ('the act') also defines business. section 2(13) of the act reads as follows: (13 ..... word "business" as defined in section 2(b) of the indian partnership act, 1932 fall within the wide ambit of the term "business" as defined in section 2(13) of the income-tax act.7. now we have to sec whether there can be a valid partnership firm without any business activity. section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932 defines the firm partnership which reads as follows: 4. partnership is the relation between persons who .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 28 2003 (TRI)

Shevantibhai C. Mehta Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Pune

Decided on : Aug-28-2003

Reported in : (2004)83TTJ(Pune.)542

..... of the retiring partner assigning or relinquishing his share and right in partnership and its assets in favour of continuing partners, the transaction would amount to transfer within the meaning of section 2(47) of the it act. this view has been substantiated in the following decisions :n.a. mody v. cit 7. the learned judges of bombay high court pointed out that the indian partnership act, 1932, did not have ..... a deed of retirement did not operate as a relinquishment of interest in immovable property but that it was merely by way of adjustment of the rights of partners and no compulsory registration was involved under section 17(1)(c). further relying on the decision of hon'ble gujarat high court in the case of cit v.mohanbhai pamabhai (supra) in which reference was ..... regarded as sale or release or assignment of his interest by a deed attracting stamp duty while the latter type of transaction would not. in other words, it is clear, the retirement of a partner can take either of two forms, and apart from the question of stamp duty, with which we are not concerned, the question whether the transaction would amount to ..... an assignment or release of his interest in favour of the continuing partners or not would depend upon what particular mode of retirement is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 27 2003 (TRI)

Anand and Company Vs. Acit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata

Decided on : Feb-27-2003

Reported in : (2004)89ITD125(Kol.)

..... erstwhile two firms m/s. anand & co. and m/s. mcd.9. the word 'firm' has been defined in section 2(23) of the act which reads as under :- "(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 of ..... owner in his business in the subsequent assessment years. it is however to be carefully noted that the question of set off arises only when the same owner continues. this right cannot be pursed by an owner to his successor. (iii) in the eye of law, income tax to be specific a firm is an entity distinct & different from its ..... -tax act, 1961, makes it clear that the prerequisite for the exercise of jurisdiction by the commissioner suo motu under ..... of the act. in this connection the ld. counsel for the assessee has placed reliance on a decision of hon'ble supreme court in the case of malabar industries co. ltd. v. cit (2000) 243 itr 83.17. in the case of malabar industries co. ltd. v. cit (supra) it was held as follows:- "a bare reading of section 263 of the income .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 29 2003 (TRI)

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Sant Shoe Store

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Decided on : May-29-2003

Reported in : (2004)88ITD524(Chd.)

..... 1993-94 and other years.7. the ld. counsel for the assessee further argued that as per section 14 of the indian partnership act, the property of the firm is defined as under:- 14. subject to contract between the partners, the property of the firm includes all property and rights and interest in property originally brought into the stock of the firm, or acquired, by purchase ..... in fact means property of the partners, as for the sake of convenience, a compendious name is given to the partnership. so for convenience, entries are made in the books ..... is treated as an entity different from its partners. it is separately assessed and when firm pays interest on capital to the partners, there are two legal entities otherwise one cannot make payment to himself. although what is capital of partnership is neither defined under section 40(b) nor in any other statutory provision, section 14 of the indian partnership act defines the property of the firm which .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 29 2003 (TRI)

Asstt. Commissioner of Vs. Sant Shoe Store

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Decided on : May-29-2003

Reported in : (2004)83TTJ(Chd.)1061

..... 1993-94 and other years.7. the ld. counsel for the assessee further argued that as per section 14 of the indian partnership act, the property of the firm is defined as under:- "14. subject to contract between the partners, the property of the firm includes all property and rights and interests in property originally brought into the stock of the firm, or acquired, by purchase ..... in fact means property of the partners, as for the sake of convenience, a compendious name is given to the partnership. so for convenience, entries are made in the books ..... is treated as an entity different from its partners. it is separately assessed and when firm pays interest on capital to the partners, there are two legal entities otherwise one cannot make payment to himself. although that is capital of partnership is neither defined under section 40(b) nor in any other statutory provision, section 14 of the indian partnership act defines the property of the firm which .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 23 2003 (TRI)

Mafatlal Holdings Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-23-2003

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!

Jun 18 2003 (TRI)

Asstt. Commissioner of I.T. Vs. Arun Chemical and Pharmaceutical

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad

Decided on : Jun-18-2003

Reported in : (2004)91ITD286(Hyd.)

..... on behalf of the business. 17. all the partners shall be faithful to each other and shall not do any such act which shall be detrimental to the interest of the business. 18. that in all other matters which are not specifically mentioned in this deed the provisions of the indian partnership act 1932 shall apply. 19. that the partners named hereinabove the right to add, alter, delete and ..... : "under the partnership act, 1932, a partnership firm has no separated legal existence a part from its partners. it is merely an association of persons who constitute the 'firm'. the firm's name is only a compedious disignation of the persons, who have agreed to carry on business in partnership. the same concept of 'firm' in imported into the income-tax act, 1961, by section 2(23). though ..... the firm is treated aw a distinct unit apart from the partners, for the p urpose of income-tax act, 1961, as in the case of hindu unidivided family, association of persons and ..... as under:- "q.no. 15:-i put it to you that you have filed application for registration as a dealer under section 12 of the andhra pradesh general sales tax act, 1957, form d, filed on 22.2.90 by you as managing partner of m/z. crystal coffee club, partnership firm. the constitution of the said firm was mentioned as that of 6 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 2003 (TRI)

Chandra Agencies Vs. Income-tax Officer [Alongwith

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Aug-29-2003

Reported in : (2004)89ITD1(Delhi)

..... was filed on the address of 17, hotel continental, regal building, new delhi. thereafter the firm was dissolved on 31.7.1986 and address in the dissolution deed was given as c-89, south extension, part-ii, new delhi. thereafter, a public notice under section 45(1) of indian partnership act was given in regard to ..... 493, the hon'ble calcutta high court has held that where the officer, who has to serve a notice of re-assessment under section 34 of the indian income-tax act, 1922 on the appellant, went to his address but found that he had gone out, offer the notice to a person who ..... paragraph that the present address of the assessee came to the notice of the department on 19.3.1997. summons under section 131 were also served on shri kapil khanna, partner for necessary compliance.proceedings were attended by shri khanna, along with smt. nitika khanna, advocate and requisite requirements asked by the ..... noting is borne out from the records available on record that assessing officer has attempted to know the whereabouts of the firm as well as of its partners. the assessment records were available with the assessing officer and the last known address i.e., 4413, jatavpura, pahari dhiraj, delhi was available on ..... and in whose presence the copy was affixed. in resorting to the method of substituted service under order v, rule 20 it is the duty of the department to discharge its onus by showing that the authority concerned had reason to believe that the assessee was keeping out of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 28 2003 (TRI)

Hotel White Vs. Ito

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Decided on : Oct-28-2003

Reported in : (2004)87TTJ(Chd.)1078

..... and courts right upto the supreme court. the proposition of law even otherwise well established is stated by their lordships as under : "the firm is treated as an entity only for certain purposes. it is not a separate juristic entity distinct from its partners. a firm cannot be equated to a corporate body. section 25 of the partnership act, 1932, excpressly states that every partner is liable ..... any difference to the position, since the liability of the partners to pay the dues of the firm does not arise ..... period when he was a partner of the firm there is no reason in principle to hold that the said liability ceases merely because a partner has ceased to be a partner subsequent to the said period. the absence of a provision corresponding to the proviso to section 46(2) of the indian income tax act, 1922, in the income tax act, 1961, prior to the introduction ..... of section 188a in the 1961 act with effect from 1-4-1989, does not make .....

Tag this Judgment!


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