Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: guwahati Year: 2003 Page 1 of about 2 results (0.018 seconds)

May 23 2003 (TRI)

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Shri Debajit Bezbarua

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Decided on : May-23-2003

Reported in : (2004)89ITD387(Gau.)

..... account for and pay to the firm all profits made by him in that business/transaction." 8.4. from reading of section 16 of the indian partnership act we find that this section starts with "subject to contact between the partners". sub-clause (a) of section 16 makes a partner liable to ..... 36 itr 18 (sc). 8.3. since the claim of the assessee is on the basis of clause 11 of the partnership deed, section 16(b) of the indian partnership act and section 88 of the indian trust act, therefore, it is necessary to take note of the same:- "16. personal profits earned by partners - subject to contract ..... an agent of the firm and he has to safeguard the best interest of the firm. clause 11 of the partnership deed, section 16(b) of the indian partnership act and section 88 of indian trust act read together would show that the assessee is statutorily bound to make over his private profit from m/s. altron ..... further addition of rs. 7,766/- without basis is totally unjustified." reliance was also placed that in view of section 16 of indian partnership act read with clause 11 of the partnership deed of m/s. p & d traders dated 31-03-93 and the case laws as submitted in the written submissions referred ..... accounted for and made over the private profit so earned to m/s. p & d traders in terms of specific provision of the partnership deed and section 16 of the indian partnership act, 1932.the profit from proprietary business m/s. altron electronics stood diverted by overriding title to m/s. p & d traders for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 07 2003 (HC)

Eastern Enterprises and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Taxes and ors.

Court : Guwahati

Decided on : Aug-07-2003

..... . 1. heard dr. a.k. saraf, learned sr. advocate for the petitioners and mr. b.j. talukdar, learned govt. advocate, assam.2. the petitioners before us is a registered partnership firm, dealing in indian made foreign liquor, beer, rum, gin etc. the petitioner firm filed its return of turnover for the period ending 31.3.1993 under the assam finance (sales tax ..... stated above, we hold that the impugned order, whereby suo moto revision was entertained and the original assessment order was revised, was passed in violation of the provision of the act and hence, not tenable under the law. the writ petition stands allowed and the impugned order passed by the deputy commissioner of taxes, guwahati zone-a, guwahati on 11.5 ..... suo moto revisional power of the deputy commissioner of taxes, guwahati mainly on the ground that no case for interference under section 36(1) of the assam general sales tax act has been made out.4. in the case of rajendra singh v. superintendent of taxes (1990) 1 glr 449, this court held that to invoke the suo moto power of ..... superintendent of taxes and the required document was submitted by them. subsequently, the deputy commissioner of taxes issued a notice under section 36(1) of the assam general sales tax act asking the petitioner to show cause as to why a suo moto revision in respect of the return for the period ending 31.3.1993 should not be initiated. the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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