Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: allahabad Year: 1960 Page 1 of about 5 results (0.018 seconds)

May 20 1960 (HC)

Pt. Deo Sharma Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P. and V. P.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-20-1960

Reported in : [1961]41ITR235(All)

..... same principle, in the present case, it must be held that the partner in the firm was srimati chandan devi for purposes of the indian partnership act even though the income received by her could be taxed in the hands of deo sharma on the finding that the income really belonged to him ..... and not in his hands. deo sharma not being himself a partner of the firm, sharma & co., in accordance with the provisions of the indian partnership act, the allocation of income between sheo nath sharma and srimati chandan devi would not be binding on him and the provisions of the provisions of the ..... that assessment, persons, who were partners of the firm, sharma & co., had to be determined in the light of provisions of the indian partnership act and, for purposes of that act, the partner was srimati chandan devi as has already been mentioned above. even if she be a benami partner, as was held by ..... proviso to section 30 (1) would not apply. the principle that a person when entering into a partnership for purposes of the indian partnership act must be treated as having joined in his individual capacity though, for purposes of income-tax, the income received by him from the ..... sufficient ground for refusing registration of the firm for purposes of the income-tax act under section 26a 26a of that act but the registration of the firm under the indian partnership act has not been set aside.the deed of partnership also recited that the partner were sheo nath sharma and srimati chandan devi and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 1960 (HC)

Mathura Datt Bhatt Vs. Prem Ballabh Khulba

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-03-1960

Reported in : AIR1961All19

..... whether a partner stands in a fiduciary capacity to the other partner or not.7. in this connection, we will first examine the relevant provisions of the indian partnership act (act ix) of 1932. the nature of 'partnership' there is defined by section 4 as being 'the relationship between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or ..... as a matter of law independently of the circumstances of any particular case. we think that this submission is too broadly made.19. from the examination of the partnership act, the trusts act and english, indian and american authorities cited hereinbefore, it would appear that it cannot be said that there is no fiduciary relationship between the partners, although on the basis of the ..... the partnership act. section 9 of the said act states that:--'partners are bound to carry on the business of the firm to the greatest common advantage, to be just and faithful to each other, and to render true accounts and full information of all things affecting the firm to any partner or his legal representative.'we will now refer to the indian trusts act ..... decision in 1894-1 ch. 343, one partner receiving assets of the partnership on account of himself and his co-partners is not liable as a person acting in a fiduciary .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 09 1960 (HC)

Moti Chandra and ors. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-09-1960

Reported in : AIR1962All291

..... else and can be subjected to tax as such. a firm is not a juristic entity and except in the income-tax act it is not considered as a person. under the indian partnership act when one speaks of a firm all the partners are meant to be spoken of. the very definition of a firm under ..... the indian partnership act shows this. for purposes of income tax, however, a firm is considered to be a unit. all the partners of a firm are ..... that as an agreement of partnership between more than twenty persons was not legally permissible, those 29 persons constituted not a firm but an association of persons. ..... it is stated in the petition that this firm also was dissolved on the 1st march 1956. the firm constituted under the earlier instrument of partnership was registered under the income-tax act for the assessment year 1948-49, and the registration was renewed for the years 1949-50, 1950-51, 1951-52 and 1952-53. ..... genuine agreement of partnership between nine persons. on the finding that 29 persons were associated together in earning the profit of the business he held that the income was in fact of an association of persons consisting of those 29 individuals.the income tax officer referred to section 4 of the indian companies act 1913 and held .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 10 1960 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi, Ajmer, Rajasthan and Madhya Bharat ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-10-1960

Reported in : [1961]41ITR245(All)

..... working in the capacity of a servant or was carrying on its business.' it was held by this court that a partnership firm under the indian partnership act is constituted for the purpose of carrying on a business only and is not constituted for the purpose of entering into service ..... the supreme court laid down the principle in the following words :'when a partnership firm comes into existence, it can be predicated of it that it carries on a business, because partnership according to section 4 of the indian partnership act 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.'after laying down this principle their lordships of ..... . this circumstance itself showed that the work of managing agents was being carried on by the partnership firm as a business and the appointment as ..... as deductible when computing the income of the assessee under the head, 'profits and gains of business' under section 10 of the income-tax act. the claim was disallowed by the income-tax officer and the appellate assistant commissioner and, when the appeal came before the income-tax appellate tribunal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 1960 (HC)

Motilal and Another Vs. Income-tax Officer, District Ii (iii) Kanpur.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Aug-08-1960

Reported in : [1962]44ITR454(All)

..... a liability on the firm and the partners of the firm at the relevant time would be liable to meet that liability under the provisions of the indian partnership act. we see no reason to assume that they will not be liable for the tax payable by the firm though they would be liable for the ..... business debts of their partnership.there may again be a case where a firm has to be assessed to tax and proceedings are started for the purpose but before they terminate ..... is an application under article 226 of the constitution by two persons who were partners of a firm which carried on business in the name and style of indian distillery at anwarganj, kanpur, praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the notices of demand dated october 24, 1959, and a writ of ..... directly traceable to the assessment made on the unregistered firm and the contention that the notice of demand was not relevant to an assessment made under the act but was related to an order of this court is in our opinion quite untenable. learned counsel has invited our attention to the provisions of sections ..... court found that in view of the fact that the petitioners had not been served with any notice of demand under section 29 of the income-tax act no recovery proceedings were maintainable against them. that petition was, therefore, allowed.after the decision of this court it appears that the income-tax officer .....

Tag this Judgment!

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