Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: andhra pradesh Year: 1966 Page 2 of about 12 results (0.067 seconds)

Aug 11 1966 (HC)

Nagasuri Raghaveswar Rao Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, A. P.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-11-1966

Reported in : [1967]66ITR496(AP)

..... the mines for carrying on mineral operations. it was a capital asset in his hands. he worked the mines for a view years himself forming a partnership firm. then he entrusted the working of mines to jajodias ltd., under the agreement. he did not assign his rights for the total unexpired period ..... yield appreciable profits or that there might have arisen some differences among the partners are long. thereafter, veeraraghavaiah did not choose to press forward and the partnership firm was dissolved. he then thought of an alternative method of exploitation which would ensure for him a dividend or income certain. he sub-leased the ..... and the mica mine was intended to be one of the sources of his income. he planned first to work the mine himself by forming a partnership firm consisting of himself (veeraraghavaiah), g. malakondiah and p. singiah under the name and style of nilgiri mica mining company, he having 12 annas share ..... & co. has attempted to define the term 'income' and referred to the word 'capital' in that connection in the following words :the object of the indian act is to tax income, a term which it does not define. it is expanded, no doubt, into income, profits and gains, but the expansion is more ..... period of 20 years with effect from may 30, 1945, on payment of a sum of rs. 60,000. he along with two others formed a partnership firm and company, for a few years. the firm does not appear to have fared well, and was subsequently dissolved. the lessee thereafter on february 21, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 23 1966 (HC)

First Additional Income-tax Officer, Visakhapatanam Vs. Uppala Peda Ve ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-23-1966

Reported in : [1967]64ITR93(AP)

..... had shown himself as a partner of two different firms in each of which one of the minor sons was admitted to the benefits of the partnership. in spite of this, the order of assessment of the father-partner did not take into account the share income of the minor sons. what ..... ) vuppala peda venkataramaniah & sons, commission kottu. each of the two minor sons of the petitioner has been admitted to the benefits of one of these two partnerships. nookaiah setty, one of the minor sons of the petitioner, is a partner in the oil mill. the other minor son, ramanaji rao, is a partner ..... decision of the judicial committee in commissioner of income-tax v. khemchand ramdas. the headnote given in the report reads as follows :'though the indian income-tax act nowhere imposes any limit of time within which an assessment under the provisions of section 23 and 29 is to be made and the service ..... sought to be made is just and proper, inasmuch as the share-income of the minor sons in the partnership firm should have been included in the petitioner as per the provisions of the act, the learned judge ought to have refused to exercise his discretion under article 226 of the constitution of india ..... kondaiah, the learned counsel for the department, realising this, mainly relief on section 35 (5). this section was incorporated by section 19 of the indian income-tax (amendment) act, 1953 (xxv of 1953), with effect from april 1, 1952. this provision can only be invoked where, in respect of any completed assessment of .....

Tag this Judgment!

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