Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat chandigarh Year: 1991 Page 1 of about 2 results (0.052 seconds)

Dec 09 1991 (TRI)

income-tax Officer Vs. Rajendera Trading Co.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Decided on : Dec-09-1991

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!

Oct 08 1991 (TRI)

J.K. Puri Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Decided on : Oct-08-1991

Reported in : (1992)40ITD159(Chd.)

..... consideration in the income-tax proceedings, we have seen as recorded in para 5 above that the assessing officer apparently acting in a bona fide manner considered the claim of sub-partnership in accordance with law and the relevant facts. after taking into consideration all the relevant facts and the law applicable ..... thereto when he made the assessment, he accepted the existence of sub-partnership. his assessment order for the year 1974-75 shows his application of mind. similarly while considering the issue of registration, he has seen that application ..... a partner to demand his share of the profit does not arise until the contingency which by operation of law, or under a covenant of the partnership deed gives rise to that right, has arisen. he also submitted that in this view of the matter, the assessee was entitled to the profits ..... the officer making the assessments for year 1974-75 was not properly instructed in law. the learned d.r. submitted that on merits, the sub-partnership could not come into existence because at the time the so-called gifts were made, there were not sufficient funds in the books of account ..... by the revenue in the case of s.p. jaiswal, this issue was neither considered nor referred to or over-ruled. in the case of indian glass agency of the delhi high court also this judgment of the jurisdictional high court in the case of dalmia dadri cement ltd. has not been .....

Tag this Judgment!

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