Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat madras Page 1 of about 45 results (0.062 seconds)

Aug 18 1988 (TRI)

income-tax Officer Vs. Dr. C. Kurshid

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras

Reported in : (1989)28ITD34(Mad.)

..... the intention of the two partners of the firm of batoola hospital to treat this property as the property of the firm within the meaning of section 14 of the indian partnership act. as stated already, it is now well settled by decisions of the supreme court and of the madras and andhra pradesh high courts referred to above, that no formal document ..... no registration was necessary when a partner brings in immovable property as his capital contribution to the firm.6. we have carefully considered the rival contentions. section 14 of the indian partnership act, 1932 reads as under:-- 14. the property of the firm.--subject to contract between the partners, the property of the firm includes all property and rights and interests in property ..... book entries made show the intention to treat the property as the property of the firm but it is not sufficient to satisfy the test in section 14 of the indian partnership act, 1932, wherein, special transfer of property is involved whereby the individual partner divests his exclusive interest in the property contributed as initial capital for share interest in the net ..... treat the property as the property of the firm, yet it was not sufficient to satisfy the requirements of section 14 of the indian partnership act, when no formalities to be complied with are laid down therein. section 14 of the indian partnership act laid down as to what is the meaning of the property of the firm. it has laid down that, subject to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 28 1991 (TRI)

Dollar Biscuit Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras

Reported in : (1992)40ITD390(Mad.)

..... by the madras high court in the case of r.m.chidambaram pillai v. cit[1970] 771tr 494 (fb) that precisely is the legal position of a firm under the indian partnership act as well.23. in the case before us the assessee claims revenue deduction in respect of a sum of rs. 1,39,900, a sum which consists of the excess ..... looked into the facts of the case. we have considered the rival submissions.17. in this case two branches of law, namely the income-tax act, 1961 and the indian partnership act, 1932 meet and cross. under the income-tax act, it is well settled, any expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business is revenue deductible. here, commercial expediency is one of ..... in the case of bhagwanji morarji goculdas v. alembic chemical works co. ltd. air 1948 pc 100 the indian partnership act, 1932 goes further than the english partnership act, 1890 in recognising that a firm may possess a personality distinct from the persons constituting it. the indian law in that respect is more in accord with the scottish law than with the english law. yet the ..... . cit [1956] 29 itr 535. in that case also the question was whether a firm can enter into a partnership with another firm or individuals. after noticing, inter alia, the aforesaid two reported cases, the supreme court held that even under the indian partnership act, 1932, a firm is not regarded as an entity separate and distinct from the members composing it; and that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 14 1981 (TRI)

income-tax Officer Vs. S. Rajamani and Thangarajan

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras

Reported in : (1982)1ITD504(Mad.)

..... court decision, and stated the law as under at page 59 : having regard to the above discussion, it seems to us clear 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 the partnership assets and when one talks of the firm's property or firm's assets all that is meant is ..... whichever is lower, and the other partners shall have no right to demand revaluation of the assets, etc.6. according to section 14 of the partnership act, the property of the firm includes all properties and rights and interest in property originally brought into the stock of the firm or acquired by purchase or ..... property, the transfer could be effected in favour of the partners only by means of an instrument in writing and registered under the provisions of the indian registration act. as this has not been done in this case, he held that there was no transfer of the property consisting of the land and building ..... between the partners and there is no question of any extinguishment of the firm's rights in the partnership assets amounting to a transfer of assets within the meaning of section 2(47) of the act. in our view, therefore, there is no transfer of assets involved even in the sense of any .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 28 1987 (TRI)

P. Sarada Vs. Inspecting Assistant

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras

Reported in : (1987)23ITD604(Mad.)

..... a restricted manner to mean that the business should have been in existence even when the persons came together and agreed to form the partnership. in the commentary on the indian partnership act by a.k.aggarwal (1982 edition at page 51), there are the following observations :- in sita ram kalani v. manmal gattani, ..... business entity it would be regarded as 'carrying on business' within the meaning of section 4, indian partnership act.the term carried on business as used is in all commercial and general terms. here the partnership deed stated that it had its own capital when the properties were brought into its common stock by ..... fact remains that the firm did not carry on any such business as per the objects of the partnership deed and ultimately dissolved on 31-3-1976. be that as it may, as per the indian partnership act, 1932, the firm cannot be recognized as a real entity as it did not carry on ..... in any event the companies were, in any view of the matter, in adverse possession.13.we have considered the rival submissions. section 14 of the partnership act reads as under :- 14. the property of the firm :- subject to contract between the partners, the property of the firm includes all property and ..... and in all other matters which are not specifically referred to, it was stated, that the firm would be governed by the provisions of the partnership act.6. subsequently, a deed of dissolution was executed on the 30th of march, 1976 to which the four partners referred to were signatories. it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 06 1990 (TRI)

First Income-tax Officer Vs. P. Asirvatha Nadar and Sons

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras

Reported in : (1990)34ITD69(Mad.)

..... the partners of the firm should always be considered as the co-owners of the properties held by the firm cannot also be accepted. under section 14 of the indian partnership act, 1932 a firm is entitled to hold the property both movable and immovable. the act of a partner bringing in his individual properties as part of his capital and treat them as ..... to deal with the asset.the question as to who can deal with the partnership property is a matter of agreement. under section 19 of the partnership act, the implied authority of a partner does not empower him to acquire immovable property for the firm or transfer immovable property belonging to the ..... dulichand laxminarayan v. cit [1956] 29 itr 535 their lordships held that there is nothing in the partnership-to suggest that the firm cannot be treated as an entity for the purpose of dealing with the property. during the subsistence of the partnership, the partnership acting through any particular partner authorised for the purpose or through all the partners will be in a position ..... liability to be taxed under the second proviso to section 10(2)(vii)of the indian income-tax act, 1922, in respect of the readjustment has to be determined according to the strict legal form of the transaction the company is a legal entity distinct from the partnership under the general law, the transfer of the machinery is by the firm to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 25 1991 (TRI)

Wealth-tax Officer Vs. V.V.V.A. Dinakaran

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras

Reported in : (1991)39ITD520(Mad.)

..... in the profits would be credited to the current account of the partners concerned. clause-16 stipulated that, as respects matters not covered by the deed, the provisions of the indian partnership act would apply. on 30-11-1986 a deed of retirement was executed, which witnessed the exit of dinakaran and mahendran from the firm from the said date. this was followed ..... hand, and on the other, the sums advanced by him to the firm for the purposes of its business. as elucidated by pollock and mulla in their commentary on the indian partnership act, the principle of sub-section (c) of section 13 is that a partner, as regards the capital brought by him into the business, is not a creditor of the firm ..... have for some specific purposes relaxed their rigid notions and extended a limited personality to a firm. the specific purposes noticed by the supreme court are:- section 49 of the indian partnership act-(i) liabilities of the firm are regarded as those of the partners, only in case they cannot be met and discharged by the firm out of its assets.(ii) liabilities ..... the question whether at all a firm/ association can be a debtor to its partners/members and, if so, in what circumstances. it is here that the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932 come into the picture.18. it is well settled that, unlike the scottish law, which invests a firm with a personality of its own, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 1990 (TRI)

M. Vedachala Mudaliar and Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras

Reported in : (1991)37ITD312(Mad.)

..... the ratio of the supreme court decisions referred to above, it would be clear that no genuine and valid partnership has been formed by m.v. kamalakannan and his wife smt. m.k.ajalakshmi, which can be recognised as a partnership under the indian partnership act. it would be noticed that the intention of the parties, as could be gathered from the recitals in the ..... will of smt. rajeswari vedachalam and from the partnership deed, is only to confer the benefits of partnership on minor santhanakrishnan and nothing more, because the entire interest of the ..... held that the income-tax officer was only empowered to register a partnership which was specified in the instrument of partnership and that it was not open to the department to register a partnership different from that which was formed by the instrument. it was further held that section 30 of the indian partnership act. was designed to confer equal benefits upon the minor by treating ..... s.t. desai, fourth edition, 1970, at page 161, the learned author states as follows, while discussing the rights of minors admitted to the benefits of partnership, under section 30 of the partnership act: - a minor cannot become a partner and so according to the definition of 'firm' in section 4 he cannot be one of that group of persons called a firm .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 08 1985 (TRI)

Controller of Estate Duty Vs. M. Thangapandian

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras

Reported in : (1985)13ITD396(Mad.)

..... any right in the goodwill or reserve fund or in sharing the profit, as the case may be. he further pointed out that section 14 of the indian partnership act, 1932 says that the firm can own property.he relied upon a decision in smt. mrudula nareshchandra v. ced [1975] 100 itr 297 (guj.). ..... body of individuals and persons and as such, was an entity comprehended by section 2(xviii) of the gift-tax act, 1958. similarly, for the proposition that a partnership firm under the indian partnership act is not a distinct legal entity apart from the partners constituting it and equally in law a firm as such ..... has no separate rights of its own in the partnership assets, and all that is meant by 'firm's assets' is ..... khemgar shah v. mrs. khorshed banu air 1970 sc 1147 that the partnership act does not operate to extinguish the right in the assets of the firm of a partner who dies when the partnership agreement provides that on death the partnership is to continue. therefore, it cannot be successfully contended that the interest ..... interest of the goodwill is augmented to the extent of the share of the deceased as per clause 14 of the partnership deed. this will straightaway attract section 5 of the act. we have to, therefore, hold that there was in fact passing of property on the death of the deceased so .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 15 1991 (TRI)

N. Deivendran Vs. Assistant Controller of Estate

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras

Reported in : (1991)38ITD289(Mad.)

..... auspicious day in the month of chithirai. the net profit or loss shall be divided between us equally. (11) in respect of matters not provided herein, the provisions of the indian partnership act shall apply.18. as pointed out earlier, no deed of retirement was drawn up when the deceased retired from the firm on 16-4-1981. on may 20,1981 the ..... partner, namely the said deceased.15. we may at the outset notice certain well settled principles having a direct bearing on this issue. these are : - (i) section 14 of the partnership act, 1932 expressly declares that the goodwill is an asset of the firm. this is of course subject to contract to the contrary between the partners. (ii) a partner of a ..... points readily suggest themselves. the deed dated june 18,1962 is absolutely silent on the question of goodwill. therefore, under the partnership act as also pursuant to the clear provisions of clause 11 of the deed, the provisions of the said act will have to be applied. this would mean that goodwill was the asset of the firm and that the right of ..... continue notwithstanding the death of a partner. this is because in the absence of a specific term in the deed of partnership to that effect, the partnership act does not operate to extinguish the proprietary right of a partner in the assets of the firm (including goodwill). this is because, as pointed out by the supreme court in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 30 1991 (TRI)

First Income-tax Officer Vs. Sree Tirupathi and Co.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras

Reported in : (1992)40ITD456(Mad.)

..... the same question was considered by the supreme court in the case of dulichand laxminarayan v. cit [1956] 29 itr 535 and the supreme court held that, even under the indian partnership act, 1932, a firm is not regarded as an entity separate and distinct from the members composing it, and that this position in law is not in any way altered merely ..... a short-hand name for a collection of persons, commercially convenient but not legally recognised". it is this principle that has been incorporated, inter alia, in section 13 of the indian partnership act, 1932. that section deals with the mutual rights and liabilities of the partners. sub-section (c) of the section stipulates that where a partner is entitled to interest on the ..... morarji goculdas v. alembic chemical works co. ltd. air 1948 pc 100, even though the indian partnership act, 1932 goes further than the english partnership act, 1890 in recognising that the firm may possess a personality distinct from the persons constituting it, yet the indian act, like the english act, avoids making a firm a corporate body enjoying the right of perpetual succession.in the case of ..... the case law on the subject, the nagpur high court ruled that, even though the indian partnership act, 1932 treats the firm as distinct from its members in certain respects, yet it does not invest the firm with a it gal personality capable of entering into a partnership with another firm or individuals. in that regard, the court further ruled that the definition .....

Tag this Judgment!


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