Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act 1932 section 17 rights and duties of partners Year: 1978 Page 1 of about 9 results (0.165 seconds)

May 02 1978 (HC)

Badri NaraIn Kashi Prasad Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax. Fancy ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-02-1978

Reported in : [1978]115ITR858(All)

..... . that is why no fresh agreement or instrument is needed.the i.t. act makes a department in the treatment of minor qua partnership. s. 2(23) of the act says :'2. (23) firm, partner and partnership have the meanings respectively assigned to them in the indian partnership act, 1932 (ix of 1932); but the expression of partner shall also include any person who, being a minor, has been admitted to ..... of the indian partnership act, the instrument evidences that on the minor electing to remain a partner on his attaining majority he will be a partner. the only situation where it can be said that the instrument does not evidence this development will be where it, on a reasonable construction, is held to provide to the contrary, namely, that a minor will have no right to ..... division bench of this court held that s. 187 merely makes a new firm liable to be assessed in respect of the income derived by the old firm. but this section, even by implication, does not create a fiction that the income derived by the old firm becomes the income of the reconsitituted firm. the income of the lod firm cannot ..... continue even if he elects to do so.in view of the fact that the i.t. act deems a minor to be a partner, there can be no change in the constitution of the firm by the mere fact of his attaining .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 25 1978 (HC)

Badri NaraIn Kashi Prasad Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-25-1978

Reported in : [1988]115ITR858(All)

..... section 30 of the indian partnership act, the instrument evidences that on the minor electing to remain a partner on his attaining majority he will be a partner. the only situation where it can be said that the instrument does not evidence this development will be where it, on a reasonable construction, is held to provide to the contrary, namely, that a minor will have no right ..... is why no fresh agreement or instrument is needed. 15. the i.t. act makes a departure in the treatment of minors qua partnership. s. 2(23) of the act says : '2. (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 ..... was as if the minor was also a partner. when a minor becomes major, and on his opting becomes a partner within the meaning of the indian partnership act, no change occurs in the constitution of the firm under the i.t. act. the instrument of partnership evidences the same number and identity of partners as before. 17. an instrument of partnership has to be reasonably construed in the background .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 12 1978 (HC)

National Small Industries Corporation Limited Vs. Punjab TIn Printing ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Sep-12-1978

Reported in : AIR1979Delhi58; ILR1979Delhi381; 1979RLR289

..... no. 5 in the present application. the other allegations in the said application are also denied by the plaintiff. section 19 of the indian partnership act. 1932 is as follows : '19.(1) subject to the provisions of section 22, the act of a partner which is done to carry on, in the usual way. business of the kind carried on by the firm ..... binds the firm. the authority of a partner to bind the firm conferred by this section is called his 'implied authority'. (2 ..... .............. (d) .............. (c) ............... (f) .............. (g) .............. (h) ...............'(7) under section 19(2)(a) of the indian partnership act a partner has no implied authority on behalf of the firm to submit dispute relating to the business of the partnership firm to arbitration. the argument is that the word submit in clause (a) of section 19(2) of the indian partnership act includes 'agreement to refer' besides 'actual reference'. there cannot ..... 'agreement to refer'. when the hire purchase agreement in question was executed all the partners of the firm defendant no. 1 did not agree to refer disputes to arbitration. in view of section 19 of the indian partnership act it is essential that all the partners agree to refer dispute to arbitration. the defendant no. 5 who alone admittedly signed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 22 1978 (HC)

V.V.P. Thangarajut Vs. K.V. Perumal Chettiar and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-22-1978

Reported in : AIR1980Mad7

..... be governed wholly by the relevant provisions of the indian partnership act. 1932.5. section 43 of the act provides for a special mode of bringing about dissolution of partnerships-at-will. the section is in the following terms:'where the partnership is at will the firm may be dissolved by any partner giving notice in writing to all the other partners of his intention to dissolve the firm; 2. the ..... 6-6-1964.3. exactly when a partnership gets dissolved in right be thought to be a question which is predominantly, if not wholly, a question of fact. in. this case her, the question has to be dealt with and determined as one of law, in- as it does,, an application of section 43 of the indian partnership act, 1932 and the construction of certain notices purporting ..... even the actual date of their communication to the other partners can have no validity or significance as notices of dissolution under sec. 43.18. i have no doubt in my mind that in this case the dissolution of the two firms was brought about only by the appellant's telegrams dated 17-12-1965, and the dissolution took effect from the dates ..... two firms as from the date of delivery of the telegrams. the receipt of the telegrams by the other partners is not disputed. it would, therefore, be proper to mark the date of dissolution of the two firms as 20-12-1965.17. the courts below however, had quite a different assessment of the legal position emerging from the appellant's notices .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 22 1978 (HC)

V.V.P. Thangaraju Vs. K.V. Perumal Chettiar and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-22-1978

Reported in : (1979)2MLJ469

..... be governed wholly by the relevant provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932.5. section 43 of the act provides for a special mode of bringing about dissolution of partnerships-at-will. the section is in the following terms:where the patnership is at will, the firm may be dissolved by any partner giving notice in writing to all the other partners of his intention to dissolve the firm;2 ..... wholly, a question of fact. in this case, however, the question has to be dealt with and determined as one of law, involving, as it does, an application of section 43 of the indian partnership act, 1932 and the construction of certain notices purporting to bring about the dissolution.4. the two firms in question in these proceedings were constituted under regular deeds of ..... date of the notice itself.12. mr. krishnamoorthy argued, on the other hand, that however the words of section 43 (2) might read on the surface, the statute does not and cannot countenance a partner possessing the right or the ability to terminate his partnership, with retrospective effect, by merely mentioning an anterior date in his notice of dissolution.13. i agree with mr ..... date on which deed of dissolution is executed is date of dissolution notwithstanding that a future date is mentioned as date of dissolution.17. plainly, this headnote does not help the appellant, for it does not say that a partnership-at-will can be dissolved with retrospective effect. but there is more to be said about this headnote. as i shall .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 13 1978 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jagat Ram Om Parkash

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-13-1978

Reported in : [1979]116ITR266(P& H)

..... firm, but the remaining four partners remained the same and the business, goodwill, name of the firm, etc., of the previous firm were also continued. even the liabilities and assets were taken over by the second firm. the scope and ambit of sections 187 and 188 of the act, in the light of the provisions of the indian partnership act, was considered by a ..... same business which was carried by the earlier firm. cl. 12 of the new partnership deed was to the following effect :'that the firm hereby formed has taken over and succeeded to all the assets, liabilities, quota rights, sales tax licences, trade marks, stock-in-trade, occupancy rights of the business premises, telephone installations, goodwill, firm's name and such other ..... reconstituted by another deed of partnership dated july 6, 1966, which was to operate from march 23, 1966, whereby shri ..... rights and privileges, etc., acquired by the said predecessor firm which came into existence by virtue of partnership deed dated february 7, 1963.'6. this firm was again .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 14 1978 (SC)

Tolaram Bijoy Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Assam

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-14-1978

Reported in : AIR1978SC504; [1978]112ITR750(SC); (1978)2SCC98; [1978]2SCR834; 1978(10)LC180(SC)

..... pass by survivorship, but the male issue of the acquirers does not take interest in it by birth (section 221, sub. section 2). if it is partnership property, it is governed by the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932, so that the share of each of the joint acquirers will pass on his death to his heirs, ..... present case falls within the ratio of the decision of this court in gowli buddanna's case : [1966]60itr293(sc) and the appellate tribunal was right in holding that the status of the respondent was that of a hindu undivided family and not that of an individual.7. learned counsel for the ..... taken by him as representing his branch. again, the ownership of the dividing coparcener is such 'that female members of the family may have a right to maintenance out of it and in some circumstances to a charge for maintenance upon it'. see arunachalam's case. it is evident that these are ..... appellant. as pointed out by the judicial committee in arunachalam's case (1957 a.c. 540) it is only by analysing the nature of the rights of the members of the undivided family, both those in being and those yet to be born, that it can be determined whether the family property ..... partnership business was originally prior to partition hindu undivided family business. hence, there was no room for applying the principle that members of a joint hindu family had not acquired the business as members of a joint family but in a separate capacity as individual partners under a contract.6. the high court rightly .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 17 1978 (HC)

S. Arunagiri Chettiar Vs. Third Income-tax Officer and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-17-1978

Reported in : [1979]117ITR308(Mad)

..... the supreme court must apply onall fours to the case before us ; the liability of the partner to pay the taximposed on the firm is sought to be made out by counsel on behalf of therevenue on the basis of the provision in section 25 of the indian partnership act.' 14. it is this passage which is very much relied upon by mr. k. srinivasan ..... other words, the ruling of the full bench is only with regard to the right of the revenue to proceed under the i.t. act by invoking section 25. it nowhere lays down that the right available to the revenue, under section 25 of the partnership act, against a partner of the firm is in any way obliterated. 16. in p. balchand v. tro : [1974]95itr321(kar) , it ..... support the petitioner to the limited extent that recovery proceedings under the act cannot be sustained. merely because an undertaking had been given to avoid coercive proceedings, we cannot hold that the petitioner would be ..... the liability of a partner to pay the tax assessed on the firm, the mere existence of a liability to pay tax is not sufficient to recover the tax. there should be a machinery provision to enforce that liability. it is only from the defaulter shown in the certificate that the tax recovery officer can recover the tax.'17. these two decisions .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 27 1978 (HC)

Surajmall Gouti Vs. Controller of Estate Duty

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Mar-27-1978

Reported in : [1979]119ITR182(Cal)

..... a share is bound to consider the balance-sheet value thereof, and cannot claim to have a higher right than the heirs of the deceased partner.26. a stranger buying the share of a partner in a firm has severely restricted rights. under section 29 of the indian partnership act, noted hereinbefore, a transferee is only entitled to a share of the profits, of the firm as long ..... furnished the value of the testator's interest in the partnership as the price at which it was to sell the interest of the testator to the surviving partners who had exercised their option. the value of the goodwill was excluded. it was held that under section 8(4)(e) of the estate duty assessment act of australia, the beneficial interest of the testator in ..... the credit of the deceased1,96,217.89l/8th share of the value of the gouti jute press 20,393.54l/8th share of the accretion in the share investment 17,133.87dividend warrant for shares held by the firm in the name of the deceased 15.063. by his letter dated the 1st august, 1967, the asst. ced called upon ..... the value of the property has depreciated by reason of the death of the deceased, the depreciation shall be taken into account in fixing the price.' 16. the estate duty rules, 1953 :' 7. (c) the share of a partner in a partnership shall be treated as an indivisible asset for the purpose of determination of its nature and locality. the share of a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 1978 (HC)

P. Krishnamurthi Vs. Assistant Collector of Central Excise, I.D.O

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-28-1978

Reported in : 1978(2)ELT628(Mad)

..... petitioner.5. section 30(1) of the indian partnership act states that a person who is a minor according to the law to which he is subject may not be a partner in a firm, but, by the consent of all the partners for the time being, he may be admitted to the benefits of partnership. sub-section (2) states that such minor has a right to such share ..... of matches despatched by the accused. the officers seized the 843 bundles of anil brand matches on the belief that the matches were being transported without payment of the excise duty due on the same. from bhimarao nana chavan 139 bundles of anil brand matches were recovered. the investigation disclosed that the accused who were manufacturers of the matches seized had ..... removed 100 bundles of such matches without payment of the duty of rs. 21,500, and had despatched the same in the aforesaid lorry. the accused are thereby said to have committed offences punishable under section. 9(d) of the central excises and salt act and contravened rule 9 of the central excise rules, an offence punishable under ..... chavan of gadhinglaj without payment of duty in contravention of the provisions of rule 9 of the central excise rules and without the gate pass in contravention of the provisions of rule 52-a of the central excise rules and thereby committed an offence, punishable under section 9(b)(ii) of the central excises and salt act.'it is now contended on behalf .....

Tag this Judgment!


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