Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: guwahati Year: 1981 Page 1 of about 4 results (0.021 seconds)

Jun 05 1981 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. R.D. Sharma

Court : Guwahati

Decided on : Jun-05-1981

..... follows: '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 section 64 of the income-tax act, 1961, the tribunal was justified in holding the view that the share of profits arising in the hands of the wife of ..... spouse in a firm carrying on a business in which such individual is a partner.'3. it is very clear that section 64 of the i.t. act speaks about the individual and there appears no scope for further interpretation. the tribunal by the impugned order held that the above question was self-evident and need ..... spouse of such individual. section 64(1)(i) of the i.t. act, 1961, runs as follows :'64. (1) in computing the total income of any individual, there shall be included all such income as arises directly or indirectly--(i) ..... a different point on facts arose in that case, in considering the present position of the case at hand, we feel that section 64 of the i.t. act, 1961, is very clear and needs no interpretation as to whether in computing the total income of any individual (an income) arises directly or indirectly to the ..... firm, m/s. asiatic trading co., was not includible in the assessment of the assessee under section 64(1)(i) of the income-tax act, 1961, and in dismissing the appeal filed by the department on that basis ?'2. the tribunal found that under section 64 of the i.t .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 01 1981 (HC)

Singh Brothers and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Guwahati

Decided on : Sep-01-1981

..... that in addition to the clauses of the instrument, the partners should be bound by the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932. on a reference the high court held that unless the instrument of partnership had specified the shares of the partners not only in the profits but also in the losses, the firm ..... of the authorities below and dismissed the appeal of the assesses. the learned tribunal considered the provisions of section 30, indian partnership act, 1932, and held that the minor could not be 'a partner' though such a minor could be admitted to the benefits of the ..... the invalidity of the instrument dated january 7, 1967. section 30 of the indian partnership act, 1932, prohibits a minor to be a full-fledged partner. a minor is legally incompetent to enter into a partnership agreement with others and to act as a partner in a firm. he can be admitted to the benefits ..... divided or borne between the partners in equal shares where one of such partners was a minor, the instrument violated section 30 of the partnership act and the partnership was invalid. as the document was invalid, the application for registration as well as the renewal for the subsequent years were violative of the ..... the supreme court held that such an instrument of the nature and character like the present one was invalid as violative of section 30 of the partnership act. although their lordships observed that there was no need to answer the question as to whether the firm could be registered on the basis of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 19 1981 (HC)

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

Court : Guwahati

Decided on : Aug-19-1981

..... ) 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!

Oct 01 1981 (HC)

Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Gangadhar Sikaria

Court : Guwahati

Decided on : Oct-01-1981

..... trust deed the tribunal is right in holding that the trust created under the said deed is valid and not inconsistent with any of the provisions of the indian trusts act, 1882 (ii) if the answer to question no. (i) above is in the negative, whether the value of the properties comprised in the said ..... , ramautar and ashok kumar, was the owner of a rice mill named and styled as 'shankar rice mills'. the major members of the huf formed a partnership, by the deed executed on 20-0-1959 (sic) in the name and style of shri shankar rice mills for running the mill business and also a ..... of the huf to alienate the properties of the joint family and to settle in trust, and the trust was not a valid trust under the indian trusts act, 1882. the ito took the same view in the income-tax assessment proceedings of the trust, not only for the assessment year 1965-66 but ..... of the second part of the proceedings. in the fitness of things, the tribunal should have, following the known practice and principles of law, meticulously acted in accordance with the second part of the order or should have given judicious reasons for its departure. these aspects of the matter were completely overlooked by ..... the learned tribunal while rejecting the prayer of the revenue under section 27 of the act. we are not at all satisfied with the reasons of the tribunal in declining to refer the case. the question of multiplicity of proceedings before the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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