Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act 1932 section 17 rights and duties of partners Page 11 of about 669 results (0.207 seconds)

May 24 1977 (HC)

Nandlal Sohanlal, Jullundur Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax, Patial ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1977P& H320; [1977]110ITR170(P& H)

..... following terms:-- '2. definitions.-- in this act, unless the context otherwise requires,-- xxx (23) 'firm', 'partner' and 'partnership' have the meanings respectively assigned to them in the indian partnership act, 1932 (ix of 1932); but the expression 'partner' shall also include any person, who, being a minor, has been admitted to the benefits of partnership.' 35. now a reference to section 5 of the indian partnership act would show that the afore-said three ..... the dissolution of the firm as envisaged by the provisions of the indian partnership act was sought to be avoided and it was perhaps rightly considered unnecessary to provide for the definition of the term 'dissolution of a firm' in the act, the language employed in clauses (a) and (b) of sub-section (2) of section 187 is so wide that it does not admit of any ..... go to that assessee, but this is not the same thing as the saying that a taxing provision should not receive a reasonable construction.' 58. in every case it is duty of the judge to consider which is the more reasonable view and accept that which is more reasonable. as i said it is only where a judge finds that both ..... reconstituted firm of which at least one of the old partners continues to be a partner of the new firm, the firm will be treated as a continuing entity in the eye of law, 17. it is no doubt true that the term 'dissolution of a firm' has not been defined in the act but that does not make any difference because the legislature .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 2007 (HC)

Radha Krishna Jalan Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Guwahati

..... defined in the indian partnership act, 1932. a partnership firm cannot become a partner in another partnership firm for the purpose of the indian partnership act, 1932 since a firm is not a person under this act and is, therefore, not eligible to enter into an agreement. but the position is otherwise insofar the it act, 1961, is concerned. in the it act, 1961, a 'person' has been defined in sub-section (31) of section 2 which, amongst ..... be frustrated by attributing literal interpretation of the provisions of the statute. an income which is already taxed in the hands of the firm is obviously not exigible to tax in the hands of the partner. this provision available in section 10(2a) is obviously incorporated ..... . but, in the context of section 22 of the it act, having regard to the ground realities and further having regard to the object of the it act, namely, 'to tax the income', we are of the view, 'owner' is a person who is entitled to receive income from the property in his own right.17. the above decisions support the view that the legislative intent cannot .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 02 1973 (HC)

Bhagwanji Devraj Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (1975)16GLR357

..... it quite clear that a partnership firm is not a legal entity distinct from its partners. a firm and its partners are, therefore, interchangeable terms. if, therefore, a partnership firm incurs any liability, it is the liability of all the partners.8. section 25 of the indian partnership act, 1932, provides that every partner is liable, jointly with all the other partners and also severally, for all acts of the firm done while ..... the context of change in the constitution of the partnership firm. if the constitution of a partnership firm changes, the personality of the firm also changes. in other words, the personality continues unchanged so long as the constitution of the firm continues unchanged. the indian partnership act does not make a firm a corporate body enjoying the right of perpetual succession therefore, up in the change ..... in the partnership of the firm, the situation changes. the concept of distinct personality, laid down by the privy council, has reference to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 11 1975 (HC)

A. Subbiah Nadar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Chennai

Reported in : [1976]104ITR564(Mad)

..... a view to make profit. section 4 of the indian partnership act makes this explicit and says that a ' partnership' is the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all. this relationship does not appear to cloud or destroy the identity of the partners whose rights and liabilities vis-a-vis each ..... and the provisions of the indian partnership act. the members of a firm, from a certain point of view, therefore ..... , remain as co-owners in a limited sense and subject to the terms of the contract of partnership and the principles of law ..... other are governed by the terms of the partnership .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 23 2003 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. A.N. Naik Associates and anr. and Ranga ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2004(2)BomCR801; (2004)187CTR(Bom)162; [2004]265ITR346(Bom)

..... consideration which are as under :'1. whether the deed of family settlement dated january 30, 1997, amounts to dissolution of partnership formed by agreement as contemplated under section 40 of the indian partnership act ?2. whether the distribution of assets of the firm amongst the retiring partners dated january 30, 1997, and the deed of reconstitution dated january 30, 1997, would amount to transfer of the ..... court posed the question whether the dissolution of a firm extinguishes the firm's rights in the assets of the partnership so as to constitute a transfer of assets under section 2(47). after considering various judgments and the provisions of the indian partnership act, the court observed that a partnership under the indian partnership act is not a distinct entity. if that be the position, the apex court ..... matter pertains to an assessment before the amendment act came into force in 1988. the issue was in respect of the retirement of a partner from a partnership. the real issue in that case was whether a partner who has retired and had received his share of the assets would be liable to be taxed under section 47.17. we may now consider the judgment in ..... b.t. patil and sons v. cgt : [1997]224itr431(kar) . we will advert to some facts. in that case, the issue before the division bench of the karnataka high court was, charging of gift-tax. in that case there was a firm with five partners which owned several .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 1963 (HC)

Uttamchand Vs. Mohandas

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1964Raj50

..... a contract admitting the minor to the benefits of a partnership, where a partnership already exists though he cannot be made a partner in a firm (vide section 30 indian partnership act). therefore, a contract by a guardian of a minor admitting him to the benefits of partnership would be a perfectly valid agreement. the agreement in this ..... raised again by one of the parties from the dead ashes of its former self. before the new right can come into being the old right must die; the cause of action under section 65 cannot exist side by side with the cause of action under the contract itself.' the learned judge ..... made to firm sriniwas ram kumar v. mahabir prasad, air 1951 sc 177, where it was held that: 'a plaintiff may rely upon different rights alternatively and there is nothing in the c. p. c. to prevent a party from making two or more inconsistent sets of allegations and claiming ..... of the privy council. in harnath kuar v. indar bahadur singh, air 1922 pc 403, a hindu of two taluqas in oudh sold his rights as primogeniture, reversioner of certain villages. their lordships of the privy council held that: 'the agreement was manifestly void from its inception, and it ..... earlier the above presumption can be rebutted by establishing circumstances to prove that the parties by lack of knowledge, appreciation or misapprehension as to their rights did not know in fact that the agreement in which they had entered into was void. the above view finds support from the following decision .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 10 2000 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. George Oommen and Co.

Court : Kerala

Reported in : (2000)163CTR(Ker)225; [2001]112TAXMAN455(Ker)

..... a business' is a must for the existence of a firm. as per explanation (i) to section 6 of the indian partnership act, sharing of profits or gross returns arising from property by persons holding a joint or common interest in that property does not make such persons partners. thus, the application for registration for the assessment year 1989-90 was dismissed. by annexure b2 ..... is it argued that the firm as constituted was granted registration at any point of time earlier. however, the second question referred to is as to whether the tribunal is right in holding that the assessee is entitled to renewal of registration. hence, we have to take it that the question for the first year, i.e., 1989-90 is regarding ..... in holding that the assessee is entitled to renewal of registration ?'2. facts of these cases are as follows: the assessee in these cases is george oommen & co., kottayam. for the assessment year 1989-90, the assessee filed an application for registration in form no. 11 on 30-3-1989 along with a copy of the partnership deed dated ..... tax act, are as follows :'1. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, investing money and earning interest therefrom and letting out of building and earning rental income therefrom would constitute an activity of business carried on by the assessee-firm ?2. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal is right .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 06 1994 (HC)

Abdul Rehman Vs. Rameshwar Dayal Prasadilal

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1994(2)WLC260; 1994(1)WLN78

..... by the sole surviving partner or the firm amba lal. in my opinion section 47 of the indian partnership act deals with such a contingency. this section reads as followscontinuing authority of patents for purposes of winding up. after the dissolution of a firm the authority of each partner to bind the firm, and the other mutal rights and obligations of the partners, continue notwithstanding the dissolution ..... the suit and an objection was taken that suit could not be continued. placing reliance upon section 47 of the indian partnership act, the learned judge decided that even after death of a partner remaining partners can represent the dissolved firm including the interest of the deceased partner to recover may debt due to the firm. in my opinion this ruling clinches the issue ..... inclined to hold that the interest of the deceased himat ram is sufficiently represented by the surviving partners who are on the record as respondents.in my opinion this is a case where section 47 of the indian partnership act is directly attracted and the surviving partner was entitled to continue the suit even though the firm stood dissolved by the death of ..... one of the two partners.16. no other point was urged before me.17. for the aforesaid premises, this appeal is devoid of .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 15 1997 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Vijai Kumar Rajesh Kumar

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : (1998)144CTR(All)582; [1998]231ITR625(All)

..... will be responsible only to the extent of his share and would not be personally liable. this stipulation is of immense significance as it is in accordance with section 30(3) of the indian partnership act, 1932.' 8. this is how the appellate authority accepted the contention of counsel for the assessee-firm and directed the assessing officer to treat the firm as a registered ..... losses of the firm by the partners in the partnership deed while in the case before us so far as the minor's liability for losses is concerned, a specific clause has been inserted indicating therein that he shall be minor liable to the loss to the extent of his share (sic) according to section 30 of the indian partnership act. . .. the only interpretation that was ..... in the same ratio in which they agreed to share losses up to 40 per cent. accordingly, the share ratio of the three partners, namely, bechan ram, ghasi ram and puhwashi prasad in losses will be 50 per cent. 17.5 per cent. and 32.5 per cent., respectively. 12. almost a similar question arose in progressive financers v. cit : [1997]224itr595 ..... , on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was rightly allowed registration under section 185 of the income-tax act, 1961 ?' 2. the assessing officer in his order passed under section 185(1)(b) of the act held that the partnership deed is defective and the firm is not entitled to registration. 3. the constitution of the assessee-firm is as under .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 17 2015 (HC)

M/s. C.M. Makhija Vs. The Chairman cum Managing Director, South Easter ...

Court : Chhattisgarh

..... has been placed on record that on the date of filing the firm was a registered partnership. consequently, as the law laid down by their lordship, as has been discussed above, the bar of section 69(3) of the indian partnership act, 1932 would come into play whereby enforcement of right of arbitration proceeding would be blocked as the application itself cannot be branded as interim in ..... been contended, therefore, it would be relevant to examine and quote section 69 of the partnership act. 69. effect of non-registration (1) no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract or conferred by this act shall be instituted in any court by or on behalf of any person suing as a partner in a firm against the firm or any person alleged to ..... register of firms as a partner in the firm. sub-section (2) similarly prohibits a suit by or ..... generally, bars certain suits and proceedings as a consequence of non-registration of firms. sub-section (1) prohibits the institution of a suit between partners inter se or between partners and the firm for the purpose of enforcing a right arising from a contract or conferred by the partnership act unless the firm is registered and the person suing is or has been shown in the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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