Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: guwahati Page 4 of about 132 results (0.027 seconds)

May 14 1975 (HC)

Phulchand Ratanlal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Guwahati

..... a partnership were not considered as discussed hereinabove. but some materials were considered which are not very relevant for the purpose. some circumstances were considered which may at best ..... the returns of income submitted for the assessment years 1961-62 and 1962-63.6. it is common case that a partnership firm may be formed even without a written document. section 4 of the indian partnership act defines 'partnership' as follows: '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.'7. thus, to form a partnership there must be an agreement between the partners to share the profits of ..... constitute a partnership-firm it is not necessary that there must always be a written document putting therein the terms of the partnership. on a consideration of the materials on record we find that, in arriving at the conclusion that the assessee could not establish its status as a firm, the legal requirements under section 4 of the indian partnership act to constitute .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 1991 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. 1. Jhabarmal AgarwallA. (i. T. R. No. 3 ...

Court : Guwahati

..... law point involved is the same, that is the interpretation of section 2(23) and section 64(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, for short the "act", and section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932.income-tax reference no. 13 of 1985 relates to the assessment year 1978-79, income-tax reference no. 3 of ..... section 64 of the income-tax act, 1961, the assessee individual was not the partner of the firm and whether the share of profits arising in the hands ..... on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a proper construction of section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, section 2(23) and section 64(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, the tribunal was justified in dismissing the departmental appeals impliedly holding the view that the share of profits from ..... application under section 256(2) of the act. by the said application the following question was sought to be referred to this court (at p. 420) :"whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper construction of section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, section 2(23) and ..... of the tribunal. thus we find that no specific law was laid down regarding section 64 of the act regarding the question as to whether the income of wife/minor child from a partnership firm can be included in assessing the income of a person who was also a partner of the firm .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 1991 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jhabarmal Agarwalla,

Court : Guwahati

..... law point involved is the same, that is the interpretation of section 2(23) and section 64(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, for short the 'act', and section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932.3. income-tax reference no. 13 of 1985 relates to the assessment year 1978-79, income-tax reference no. 3 ..... section 64 of the income-tax act, 1961, the assessee-individual was not the partner of the firm and whether the share of profits arising in the hands ..... on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a proper construction of section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, section 2(23) and section 64(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, the tribunal was justified in dismissing the departmental appeals impliedly holding the view that the share of profits from ..... application under section 256(2) of the act. by the said application the following question was sought to be referred to this court (at p. 420):'whether, on the fads and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper construction of section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, section 2(23) and ..... of the tribunal. thus we find that no specific law was laid down regarding section 64 of the act regarding' the question as to whether the income of the wife/minor child from a partnership firm can be included in assessing the income of a person who was also a partner of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 03 1987 (TRI)

income-tax Officer Vs. Tuli Veneer Plywood Industries

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Reported in : (1988)24ITR345(Gau.)

..... not entitled to registration as it makes the minor liable for the losses during the period km. sangita remained a minor. in this context, he referred to mukherjee's indian partnership act, 1976, edition, pages 249-251.5. in reply, the assessee's learned counsel supporting the aac's order brought to our notice the recitation made in the deed that an ..... previous year next after the date of attaining majority could be granted registration under section 185(1)(a). it was held that under the provisions of the partnership act, a minor admitted to the benefits of partnership had two options open to him on attaining majority ; (i) he should either elect to become a partner in the firm, or (ii) he should repudiate ..... registration having been found to be in order, the requirements of section 185(1)(a) of the income-tax act, 1961 ('the act'), had been satisfied.6. the partnership deed as available from the ito's records reveal that as per oral agreement a partnership was formed w.e.f. 1-1-1981. the recital to that effect reads as follows : whereas the partners ..... hereto to the first part to fifth part made an oral agreement and formed a partnership between themselves with effect from .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 04 1976 (HC)

Paresh Chandra Kar and ors. Vs. the Bakijai Officer and ors.

Court : Guwahati

..... is the dealer in question.10. in order to appreciate this submission, it is necessary to examine how a partner may retire from a partnership firm and since when the retirement takes effect.11. section 32 of the indian partnership act, 1932, deals with retirement of a partner and it reads as follows :32. retirement of a partner.-(1) a partner may retire-(a ..... , 1965, petitioners nos. 1 and 2 have retired, that will not absolve them from the legal liabilities under the provisions of the indian partnership act, because no case of retirement could be made out by them.13. section 2(2) of the act defines 'dealer' as follows :2. (2) 'dealer' means any person who sells taxable goods manufactured, made or processed by him in ..... to bring the case of retirement of petitioners nos. 1 and 2 from the dealer-partnership firm within clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 32 of the indian partnership act. so also there is nothing in the record to show that either the partnership is at will or notice was given in writing to all the other partners by petitioners ..... nos. 1 and 2 of their intention to retire from the partnership firm. in the same way we do not find any .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 23 1976 (HC)

K.C. Trunk and Bucket Factory Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Guwahati

..... death of the deceased partner ?' the relevant facts may be briefly stated: the assessee, m/s. k. c. trunk & bucket factory, gauhati, was a firm, registered under the indian partnership act. the partnership deed dated may 25, 1959, shows that the firm had three partners, kisturchand siotia, bhairulal siotia, and mahabir prasad siotia, who executed the deed and that a minor, sohanlal siotia ..... not, therefore, permissible to break the periods of accounting and to allow piece-meal registration of the instrument of partnership under section 26a of the income-tax act. the registration under section 26a is an annual registration.' 28. although section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922, fell for consideration in the above decision, the relevant law is unchanged in the 1961 ..... certain facilities, which are not available to an unregistered firm. 7. an application for the registration of a partnership firm, for the purposes of the income-tax act, may be made under section 184 of the act, if the partnership is evidenced by an instrument and the individual shares of the partners are specified in that instrument (sub-section (1)). the application ..... k. sen, learned counsel appearing for the assessee, submits that sub-section (7) of section 184 of the act was complied with. he submits that there has been no change in the constitution of the firm as evidenced by the instrument of partnership, and that under proviso (ii) the declaration has been made to that effect. the point that now falls .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 09 1965 (HC)

Chandypore Tea Estate Vs. Commissioner of Taxes, Assam.

Court : Guwahati

..... the agricultural income-tax for the assessment year 1956-57 and 1957-58. the petitioner-firm is a firm registered under the indian partnership act, 1932, hereinafter called the "income-tax act." the income derived by the petitioner-firm having been regarded as agricultural income, forty per cent. thereof had been assessed to income ..... share and the income-tax assessment was made.it is contended that as the petitioner-firm is registered both under the income-tax act as well as under the partnership act, the same principle of apportionment must be followed and the firm should not be assessed as an individuals but the income of ..... made.in the result, we answer the question referred to us as follows :1. for the purpose of the assam agricultural income-tax act, 1939, the partnership firm of chandypore tea estate must be regarded as a separate assessable entity and the income derived by it assessed as such and not on ..... each partner according to his share should be assessed under act in the same way as it was done under the income-tax act. this argument was ..... decision of this court on the following questions of law :"(1) whether, for the purpose of the assam agricultural income-tax act, 1939, the partnership firm of chandypore tea estate is a separate assessable entity apart from the individual partners who constitution the firm ?(2) whether, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 02 1995 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Tuli Veneer and Plywood Industries

Court : Guwahati

..... the scope and ambit of the jurisdiction conferred on the authorities this court has jurisdiction to entertain the reference.' 4. as regards the rights of a minor admitted to the partnership under section 30 of the indian partnership act, 1932, this court held as follows (at page 562) : 'it will be seen that on attaining majority a minor admitted to the benefits of the ..... partnership, has two options open to him : (1) he may elect to become a partner in the firm, or (2) he may repudiate or elect not to become a partner. if ..... to become a partner and he becomes liable for all the obligations of the firm 'from the date of his admission to the benefits of partnership'. it follows, therefore, that he may, either by a consentient act on his part, become a partner or become so by his inaction for six months as allowed. on a perusal of section 30(5) and ..... income-tax authorities is restricted to finding out two facts : (1) whether the application is in due compliance with the provisions of the act and the rules, and (2) whether the firm, represented in the instrument of partnership, is a bogus one or has no legal existence. the discretion conferred on the authorities is a judicial one and ought not to be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 2005 (HC)

M.S. Associates Vs. Uoi

Court : Guwahati

..... 2000 :(a) the case of the petitioner in this writ petition is, in brief, as follows.4. the petitioner, m/s. m.s. associates, is a partnership firm, duly registered under the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1931 with smt. jyoti limbu and smt. tilmaya chong as its two partners, having its registered office at connaught place, new delhi, and branch office at ..... the possession of the revenue is quite immaterial. in maharaj kumar kamal singh v. cit : [1959]35itr1(sc) , the supreme court, while construing section 34(1)(b) of the indian income tax act, 1922, has held that the word 'information' appearing therein should be treated to mean not only facts or factual materials, but should also include information as to the true ..... valuable article or thing represents either wholly or partly income or property which has not been, or would not be, disclosed for the purposes of the indian income tax act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or this act (hereinafter in this section referred to as the undisclosed income or property), then,(a) the director general or director or the chief commissioner or commissioner, as ..... not, produce or cause to be produced, any books of account or other documents which will be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under the indian income-tax act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or under this act, or(c) any person is in possession of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing and such money, bullion, jewellery or other .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 19 1981 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Basanta Kumar Agarwalla and anr.

Court : Guwahati

..... ) and section 64 of the income-tax act, 1961, the assessee, individual (......*1) was not the partner of the firm (......*2) and whetherthe share of profits arising in the hands of the ..... . talukdar, learned standing counsel for the revenue, that the cases involve an interpretation of section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, and sections 2(23) and 64(1)(ii) of the act. 7. our attention has been drawn to section 256(1) of the act where it is said that the tribunal shall draw a statement of the case and refer any question of ..... (2) of the i.t. act, for short 'the act', requiring the income-tax appellate tribunal, gauhati, to refer to the high court the following purported question of law arising out of the orders of 'the tribunal'. 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a proper construction of section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, section 2(23 ..... laws: the sum and substance of the contention is that as the tribunal has referred section 64 of the act in its orders, it invariably follows that the cases involve interpretation of the said provision as well as section 4 of the partnership act, 1932. 8. we are unable to appreciate the contention of the revenue. although section 256(2) has been couched .....

Tag this Judgment!


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