Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat chandigarh Page 1 of about 27 results (0.256 seconds)

Nov 14 1994 (TRI)

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Smt. Rekha Munjal

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Reported in : (1995)52ITD541(Chd.)

..... in favour of m/s thakur devi investments pvt.ltd. she is divested of the share which has been gifted by her. section 29 of the indian partnership act does not come in the way of the assessee's claim either. that section is meant to restrict the rights of a person in whose favour the ..... it was submitted that the facts of the above case fully supported the case of the assessee. it was also submitted that section 29 of the indian partnership act did not stand in the way of the assessee. it was pointed out that that section was enacted for a particular purpose which was not to allow ..... bound to accept the account of profits agreed to by the partners. it was vehemently argued that according to section 29 of the indian partnership act, the partners continued to run the partnership firm and with a view to avoiding any confusion friction, the transferees had no substantial say in the matter of running of the ..... that some of the cases relied on by the learned counsel for the assessee were of sub-partnership which was not the issue at hand and hence those cases were not applicable to the present case.14. we have carefully considered the rival submissions ..... the said firm was paid to the lenders.it was held that the agreements between the assessee and the lenders were practically in the nature of sub-partnership and hence the payments in question constituted a case of diversion of income by an overriding title.13. in reply, the learned d.r. submitted .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 23 1982 (TRI)

income-tax Officer Vs. Bishamber Lal

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Reported in : (1983)3ITD310(Chd.)

..... or indirectly. since the origin of the said income is out of a partnership and, if we look to the definition of 'partnership', we find that in the indian contract act, 1872, it was contained in section 239 (now repealed by the indian partnership act, 1932) which was founded upon kant's definition who defined 'partnership': as a contract of two or more competent persons to place their ..... money, effect, labour and skill or some or all of them in lawful commerce or business and to share the profit and bear the loss in certain proportions." this definition was condensed in section 239 of the indian contract act ..... in the following words : partnership is the relation which subsists between persons who have agreed to combine their property, labour or skill in some business and to share the profits thereof between ..... to the three minor sons of the assessee by virtue of their admission to the benefits of partnership in the firm could not be included in the total income of the assessee." (pp. 27-28) the above said case, which was under the indian income-tax act, 1922, came to be followed by the calcutta high court in the case of prahladrai agarwala .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 23 1985 (TRI)

Vee Kay Enterprises Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Reported in : (1985)14ITD187(Chd.)

..... and haryana high court, a full bench decision in the case of nandlal sohanlal v. cit [1977] 110 itr 170, in income-tax matters we should not resort to the indian partnership act, 1932, etc.3. after taking into consideration the rival submissions and going through the documents and case law cited by the two parties, i am unable to confirm the action ..... partners and other third parties.... (p. 693) in the instant case, evidence regarding share is available within four corners as it is to be as per the indian partnership act, as per clause 24 of the partnership deed and as per section 13, it is to be equal.similarly, reliance of the learned departmental representative on rai bahadur jodha mai ghungar mai's case ..... .... (p. 89) no such defect was pointed out by the ito. then, in the instant case, it is specifically mentioned in clause 24 of the partnership deed that the partnership shall be governed by the provisions of the indian partnership act. coming to the case of kylasa sarabhaiah (supra), what was held regarding specification of share, read as under : (v) that the word 'specifying' was ..... that the two partners meant to have equal shares, which is apparent from clause 24, given above, that 'in respect of matters not mentioned herein, the partnerships shall be governed by the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932'. then conduct of the assessee as well by contributing absolutely equal capital which is in a sum of rs. 18,860 by both the partners .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 29 2003 (TRI)

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Sant Shoe Store

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Reported in : (2004)88ITD524(Chd.)

..... drew our attention to assessment made in assessment year 1993-94 and other years.7. the ld. counsel for the assessee further argued that as per section 14 of the indian partnership act, the property of the firm is defined as under:- 14. subject to contract between the partners, the property of the firm includes all property and rights and interest in property ..... on capital to the partners, there are two legal entities otherwise one cannot make payment to himself. although what is capital of partnership is neither defined under section 40(b) nor in any other statutory provision, section 14 of the indian partnership act defines the property of the firm which in fact means property of the partners, as for the sake of convenience, a ..... compendious name is given to the partnership. so for convenience, entries are made in the books of account of the partnership relating to capital contributed by the partners, amount withdrawn by ..... for the sake of convenience and for practical purposes, entries are made having regard to the market value of items and transactions involved. till the actual value is determined, the partnership acts on above notional entries.for all practical purposes, these notional entries are as good as real.these are binding on partners and .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 29 2003 (TRI)

Asstt. Commissioner of Vs. Sant Shoe Store

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Reported in : (2004)83TTJ(Chd.)1061

..... drew our attention to assessment made in assessment year 1993-94 and other years.7. the ld. counsel for the assessee further argued that as per section 14 of the indian partnership act, the property of the firm is defined as under:- "14. subject to contract between the partners, the property of the firm includes all property and rights and interests in property ..... on capital to the partners, there are two legal entities otherwise one cannot make payment to himself. although that is capital of partnership is neither defined under section 40(b) nor in any other statutory provision, section 14 of the indian partnership act defines the property of the firm which in fact means property of the partners, as for the sake of convenience, a ..... compendious name is given to the partnership. so for convenience, entries are made in the books of account of the partnership relating to capital contributed by the partners, amount withdrawn by ..... for the sake of convenience and for practical purposes, entries are made having regard to the market value of items and transactions involved. till the actual value is determined, the partnership acts on above notional entries.for all practical purposes, these notional entries are as good as real.these are binding on partners and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 09 1991 (TRI)

income-tax Officer Vs. Rajendera Trading Co.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Reported in : (1994)48ITD210(Chd.)

..... under rule 2 of the income-tax rules.18. in malabar fisheries co.'s case (supra), their lordships of the hon'ble supreme court have held that a partnership firm under the indian partnership act, 1932, is not a distinct legal entity apart from the partners constituting it and equally in law the firm as such has no separate rights of its own in ..... he emphasised for the purpose that the meaning of the above three has to be taken as assigned to these words in the indian partnership act, 1932. he as such contended that a partner and a firm are the same entity since persons joining hands for a common purpose and economic ends, individually are called partners ..... the indian partnership act, 1932.27. in a way, then with three different capacities of the same person, it can safely ..... , if the assessee-firm is not to be taken a separate legal entity under the general law - indian partnership act, 1932, which it has to be taken as such in view of definitions of "firm", "partner" and "partnership" under clause (23) of section 2 of the income-tax act, 1961. therein, the meaning of the above three words have to be taken as assigned in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 07 2006 (TRI)

Joint Commissioner of Vs. Kwality Cafe and Restaurant (P.)

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Reported in : (2007)105ITD169(Chd.)

..... a monopoly was created for the assessee for use of 'kwality' brand name in the specified areas.inviting our attention to section 34 of indian trade marks act, it was pointed out that the prior user of the trademarks gets preference over the subsequent registration of the trademark. it was contended that ..... the assessee, on the other hand, contended that the assessee company was a successor to partnership firms. the restaurant business had been started by the assessee from 28-3-1994. in the year 1994 itself two partnership firms had merged. it was pointed out that lamba family had started ice-cream business ..... not sufficient as it was without any basis. it was further contended that the amendment in section 55(2)(a) and section 32 of the act clearly indicate the legislative intent. it was accordingly pleaded that the appeal of the revenue may be allowed.20. we have given our careful consideration ..... . miller & co. ltd. relied upon by the departmental representative is distinguishable on facts. it was further contended that section 41 of the income-tax act, 1961 is not applicable in this case. referring to the contention advanced on behalf of the revenue that the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) has admitted ..... that right to sue was not an actionable claim. the learned counsel further invited our attention to section 55(2)(a) of the income-tax act, 1961 which has been amended with effect from 1-4-1998 and partly with effect from 1-4-2002 applicable prospectively. it was contended that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 28 2003 (TRI)

Hotel White Vs. Ito

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Reported in : (2004)87TTJ(Chd.)1078

..... from its partners. a firm cannot be equated to a corporate body. section 25 of the partnership act, 1932, excpressly states that every partner is liable, jointly with all the other partners and also severally, for all acts of the firm done while he is a partner. section 25 does not make a distriction between ..... of partners. the revenue had nothing to do with those decrees. a creditor who has already recovered from shri gurdial singh the amount due from partnership could not be permitted to take the stand that he would now make recovery from the correct legal entity.the case of the revenue does not ..... applicable in this case shri gurdial singh was admittedly a partner of m/s hotel white. he was jointly and severally liable for liability of the partnership inclusive of taxes.the it department could assess and recover 100 per cent of tax payable by the firm on its income from sh. gurdial singh ..... as a partner. the learned civil judge vide his order dated 30-10-1990, decreed the suit for rendition of accounts. it was further held that partnership was not validly dissolved on 31-3-1981, as claimed by shri gurdial singh. the appeal against above decision was dismissed by learned district judge, ..... said period. the absence of a provision corresponding to the proviso to section 46(2) of the indian income tax act, 1922, in the income tax act, 1961, prior to the introduction of section 188a in the 1961 act with effect from 1-4-1989, does not make any difference to the position, since the liability .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 30 1982 (TRI)

Ram Murti Sood Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Reported in : (1982)2ITD115(Chd.)

..... that there was no expediency shown for even purchasing the car for purposes of the business of the firm and that there was no clause in the partnership deed that he would carry on the business of the firm with a transport of his own. the orders of the authorities below may, therefore, be ..... that the claim of the assessee, a partner in a firm, to deduct half of the motor expenses, including depreciation, from his share income from the partnership, on the ground that it related to his carrying on the business, was allowed by the hon'ble high court, on a reference, by holding that, ..... all, there are three partners. when the firm was constituted, he did not own a car. it is common ground that in the instrument evidencing the partnership under the name and style of 'sood bhandri & co.', there was no stipulation as to the expenditure to be paid to this partner with regard to ..... was incurred as a matter of commercial expediency and for purpose of earning profits from the partnership business, the partner would be entitled to claim the deduction of the amount under section 10(2)(xv) of the 1922 act or under the general principle laid down by the privy council in cit s.m. chitnavis ..... hon'ble supreme court in the case of ramnikal kothari (supra) was under the indian income-tax act, 1922 (the '1922 act') the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the judgment of the gujarat high court is under the 1961 act and related to the assessment year 1962-63. he also submitted that the provisions .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 12 1983 (TRI)

Bakeman'S Home Products Vs. Income-Tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Reported in : (1984)7ITD371(Chd.)

..... the issues. the factual background is as under.2. a private limited company known as rieta biscuit co. (p.) ltd. ('the lessor') incorporated under the indian companies act, 1956, with its registered office at patiala, was in possession of, as its business assets, land, factory, building, machinery, plant, furniture, fixture and other ..... the partnership concern for the above purpose. this partnership was deemed to have commenced with effect from 23-8-1977. clause (6) of the instrument provides that the accounts books ..... arrangement as may be arrived at with the said company after negotiations. for this purpose, the parties to this instrument of partnership authorised seth charan dass being the party of the first part to this instrument to negotiate with the management of the said company on behalf of ..... of the said date executed and drawn up on that date. the business of the partnership was to be carried on by the firm of bakeman's home products. this partnership was constituted by six partners, i.e., this partnership was formed, 'with an object to run the factory owned by rieta biscuit co. ..... the opinion that the payment made by the assessee was excessive or unreasonable in terms of section 40a(2)(a) of the income-tax act, 1961 ('the act'). he gave an opportunity to the assessee as to why a part thereof need not be disallowed to which the assessee submitted replies dated .....

Tag this Judgment!


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