Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: andhra pradesh Page 11 of about 661 results (0.053 seconds)

Apr 10 1987 (HC)

South India Textiles and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1989AP55

..... consisting of petitioners 2 to 5 as partners. they sought for registration of the firm under section 58(1) of the indian partnership act, 1932 (act lx of 1932) (for short 'the act') with the name 'the south india textiles' to do business at secunderabad as distributors of madras coats limited situated at ambasamudram, tamilnadu state. the application was returned with a direction ..... many a firm or proprietary concerns. therefore, by no stretch of imagination it can be said that it is improper use within the meaning of section 3 of the emblems act. 7. accordingly, the refusal of the permission to use the word 'india' in the firm's name is in excess of the power. the impugned order is accordingly quashed. the ..... not signify either sanction, approval or patronage of the government. therefore, the sanction of the government is redundant under sub-section (3) of section 58 of the act.5. with regard to emblems act section 3 provides prohibition of improper use of certain emblems and names :'notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, no person shall except ..... word 'india' from the name of the firm stating that the word 'india' is prohibited under the provisions of the emblems and names (prevention of improper use) act, 1950 (for short 'the emblems act'). subsequently they made a representation to the first respondent state government on may, 2, 1979 seeking permission to use the name 'the south india textiles' by the impugned .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 1979 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. G. Parthasarathy Naidu and Sons

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : [1980]121ITR97(AP)

..... a legal personality and the general concept of the firm remains unchanged by reason of the taxability of the firm as a unit. true, as pointed out earlier, under the indian partnership act or under the english common law, a firm is not a full legal personality. but it has now been recognised that it has some personality and for the purposes of ..... firm as separate entities is illegal. he elaborates this contention by referring to the meaning of the expressions 'firm', 'partner' and 'partnership' being statutorily imported into the i.t. act from the indian partnership act. according to the learned counsel, wherever the i.t. act contemplated to make special provisions regarding the mode of assessment and other matters associated with the same, a special provision has ..... in these circumstances, to import the definition of the word 'person' occurring in section 3(42) of the general clauses act, 1897, into section 4 of the indian partnership act will, according to lawyers, english or indian, be totally repugnant to the subject of partnership law as they know and understand it to be. it is in this view of the matter that it has been ..... in order xxx, rule 1, civil procedure code. if parliament intended that a firm should be treated as a legal personality under the income-tax act it was wholly unnecessary for parliament to have defined 'firm' by reference to the indian partnership act. what we wish to emphasise is that a firm, which may be a taxable entity, does not on that account acquire or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 20 1970 (HC)

Challa Appalaswamy Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : [1971]82ITR731(AP)

..... the department requires the assessee to do. in interpreting the relevant clauses in the instrument of partnership, care has to be taken to find out whether such clauses contravene the provisions of section 30 of the indian partnership act, the relevant portion of which reads as under :'30. (1) a person who ..... evident that the profits can be divided between the partners as per the terms agreed upon by them under section 30(2) of the partnership act. the aluminium business and thecrucibles business have been treated as separate units by the assessee-firm-separate accounts have been maintained for each of ..... his conclusion on relevant evidence.'8. the assessee-firm has been constituted under an instrument of partnership, specifying the individual shares of the partners within the meaning of section 26a(1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. it has, under rule 2 of the income-tax rules, applied to the income ..... accordance with the respective shares of the partners he couldin the exercise of powers vested in him impose a penalty under section 28 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, but could not in any case refuse or cancel registration.6. as against the above arguments, the learned counsel, sri ramarao, ..... of the indian income-tax act, 1922, for the assessment year 1960-61 and 1961-62 and under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, for the assessment year 1962-63.3. the question, for its answer, depends upon the interpretation of the relevant clauses of the instrument of partnership. they .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 04 1971 (HC)

N. Annajee Rao and Brother Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : [1974]97ITR265(AP)

..... it is not possible to conclude that he is a money-lender. hence, the provisions of section 13(d) or section 48(b)(ii) of the indian partnership act, referred to above, do not advance the plea of the assessee herein that the assessee's advancing monies over and above its share of capital constitutes money- ..... clause (d) of section 13 of the indian partnership act, a partner, who pays or advances any amount for the purposes of the business beyond the amount of capital agreed to be subscribed by him, is entitled to ..... business cannot be acceded to. in support of his plea, the counsel relied upon the provisions of section 13(d) and section 48(b)(ii) of the indian partnership act, 1932, and the decision of this court in kasamsetty radhakrishnaiah chetty v. commissioner of income-tax, [1967] 64 i.t.r. 522 (a.p.). under ..... to a firm of which he is a partner, it cannot be money-lending business'. referring to the provisions of section 13(d) of the partnership act, it was observed by this court thus:'it is sufficient to state that we cannot accept the view of the tribunal that in no event can ..... been referred for the opinion of this court by the income-tax appellate tribunal, hyderabad bench, under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'):'1. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to claim the sum of rs .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 1971 (HC)

Khummaji Milapchand and Co. and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : [1973]91ITR333(AP)

..... is that the shares of the major partners in loss in the firm have not been specified in the instrument of partnership. we cannot for this purpose take recourse to section 13(b) of the indian partnership act. section 13(b) of the indian partnership act says that, subject to an agreement to the contrary, the shares of the partners, if not specified, will be taken as ..... shares of the partners, a deed of partnership between a firm and an individual which specified the collective shares of the ..... specification of shares in the instruments of partnership meant clear setting out of fraction or proportion of the share in the instrument does not now hold the field. the supreme court has given an enlarged and a liberal meaning to the word ' specified'. the word 'specifying ' was used in section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922 and in rule 2 of ..... firm b the deed of partnership of firm b was signed by all the major partners of firm a. the question was whether firm b was entitled to be registered under section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922. their lordships of the supreme court held that the right to registration under section 26a being conditional upon the specification of the individual .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 19 1970 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, A. P. Vs. Mandyala Govindu and Co.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : [1971]82ITR926(AP)

..... losses, the partners must be held to be liable to contribute equally to the losses sustained by the firm as provided under section 13(b) of the indian partnership act. no doubt, section 13(b) of the indian partnership act lays down that, subject to contract between the partners, the partners are entitled to share equally in the profits earned, and shall contribute equally to the ..... , is made liable for the losses also in the proportion mentioned in clause 2 or equally with the other partners. that being so, the partnership cannot be said to be void. under section 30 of the indian partnership act, though a person who is a minor according to law to which he is subject may not be a partner in a firm, he may ..... partnership is a condition precedent for entitling the firm to registration. resorting to the application of section 13(b) of the ..... section 26a requires specification of shares in the instrument of partnership, any determination of the share of the partners in the profits or in the losses not with reference to the particular instrument but by resort to section 13 of the indian partnership act would be to supply the omission in the instrument of partnership. specification of shares of the partners in the instrument of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 2002 (HC)

Jai Narayan Misra (Died) Per Lrs. Vs. Hashmathunnisa Begum (Died) Per ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2002(3)ALD406; 2002(3)ALT689

..... the light of the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for both the parties, it is essential to refer to certain clauses of ex. a2 and the provisions of the indian partnership act:clause (24) of ex. a2 reads as follows: 'the party of the second part hereby declares, covenants and agrees that at the end of the period of forty two (42 ..... the supreme court in commissioner of income tax v. suraj bahn om prakash, 1986 income tax reports 833, wherein it was held that by virtue of section 42 of the indian partnership act, on account of death of a partner the firm stands automatically dissolved.30. in , the supreme court held that in a firm consisting of two partners on account of death ..... undisputed fact that at any point of time the 2nd party paid not more than rs. 2,000/- per month to the 1 st party. 23. section 42 of the indian partnership act contemplates various methods of dissolution of a firm. it reads as follows: '42. dissolution on the happening of certain contingencies :--subject to contract between the partners a firm is dissolved ..... 2nd party can be treated as the properties of the firm, i wish to examine the relevant provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932 ('the act' for brevity), the legal position and the terms of the contract between the parities. section 14 of the act reads as follows: '14. the property of the firm - subject to contract between the partners the property of the firm .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 23 1998 (HC)

Ramlal Agarwal Vs. Rampratap and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 1998(6)ALD76

..... . this view of ours gets ample support from mulla hindu law, page 265 (16th edition), wherein it is stated that such a partnership could be governed by the provisions of indian partnership act, 1932 with the result that if the manager dies, the partnership would be dissolved. privy council has also expressed the opinion in pichappa v. chokalingam, air 1934 pc 192, if a member ..... of the joint family joins in partnership with strangers it is in his individual capacity but not the other members. therefore, it is clear ..... of joint family assets in the hands of third parties can be enforced. but when the asset is a share in the partnership firm, the remedy lies in accordance with the terms of the partnership deed and the provisions of the partnership act, 1932, but not by way of a simple suit for partition. it is well settled that when a member of a ..... a partner in a firm, his rights and obligations in respect of other partners of the firm are determined by the partnership act and not by the principles under hindu law. so also if any of the coparceners desires to discontinue the partnership business entered into by the kartha of the joint family, they can only sue the kartha of the family for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 2012 (HC)

K. Laxminarayana Reddy, Since Died Per L Vs. Vardhi Reddy Dasrath Ram ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

hon'ble sri justice c.v. nagarjuna reddy c.r.p.no.1554 o 9. 4-2012 k. laxminarayana reddy, since died per l.r. k. ranganadha reddy vardhi reddy dasrath ram reddy (died)and others head note: counsel for petitioner : sri m.v.s. suresh kumar counsel for respondent nos.2 & 9 : sri jithender rao veeramalla counsel for respondent no.3 : sri d. prakash reddy,senior counsel for sri p. venka reddy counsel for respondent nos.4 & 5 : sri p. venugopal counsel for respondent no.7 : sri ch. siva reddy ?cases referred:1. air 196.s.c.

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 15 1994 (HC)

Chillakuru Chandrasekhara Reddy Vs. Pamuru Vishnu Vinodh Reddy and Oth ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1995AP49; 1994(2)ALT375

..... entitlement, he is entitled to interest at the rate of six per cent per annum in the property of the firm. section 37 of the indian partnership act, also says that in the case of an outgoingpartner, he is entitled to such share of the profits made since he ceased to be a ..... utilising his share without paying the consideration for which it was sold, then he is liable to account. section 37 of the indian partnership act corresponds to section 42 of the english partnership act, 1890.17. lord lindley defined the share of a partner in the following manner: 'what is meant by the share of ..... 1scr781 and the judgment of the madras high court in 1944 (1) mlj 191 (sic).16. there is no judgment under the indian partnership act directly on the issue, section 37 of the partnership act deals with the rights of an outgoing partner in certain cases. if a partner sells his share to the other partner-and the ..... the share of the plaintiff is arbitrary, as it has no nexus to the date of retirement of the partner. counsel submits that under the indian partnership act, in case of retirement of a partner, the relevant date for the purpose of ascertaining the value of the share of the partner is the ..... is what is the relevant date for the purpose of ascertaining the value of the share of the plaintiff in the partnership firm.9. in this context, sections 37 and 48 of the indian partnership act may be relevant to some extent. section 37 deals with the rights of an outgoing partner in certain cases to share .....

Tag this Judgment!


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