Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat mumbai Page 1 of about 104 results (0.062 seconds)

Dec 31 1990 (TRI)

Central Cloth Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1991)37ITD1(Mum.)

..... .e., the shares are not specified but left to imagination, hence it cannot be said on those facts that there was a firm or a partnership in the eyes of law as stood defined in the indian partnership act, 1932 and for income-tax purposes.to the same effect is the decision of the punjab high court (as it then was). it is reported ..... be carried forward/accumulated to be distributed in such manner/in such proportion/at such time as the parties to the deed of partnership may decide upon from time to time.6. under section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, 'partnership' is the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them ..... : - the stand of the assessee is that the assessee meets the requirements of law in terms of the definitions in the income-tax act, 1961 and the indian partnership act, 1932 vis-a-vis the definitions of 'firm', 'partners' and 'partnership'. the stand of the revenue is that charge of tax, qua the assessees have to be under section 167a inasmuch as shares of the ..... lack of precision in the language to express and in that case it will be subject to the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932 but when the uncertainty is in terms of clear expression, then the replationship cannot be termed as partnership. in the case of the assessees-appellants, a part of the profits - a very negligible part of the profit - is to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 23 2003 (TRI)

Mafatlal Holdings Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)85TTJ(Mum.)821

..... associates, with the registrar of firms. in the case of dulichand laxminarayan v. cit (1956) 29 itr 535 (sc), the hon'ble supreme court held that section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, clearly requires the presence of three elements to constitute a firm namely (i) that there must be an agreement entered into by two or more persons; (ii) that the ..... the case of bharat nidhi ltd. (supra) relied upon by the learned departmental. representative is not relevant to the facts of this case. according to him, partnership firm is not a person in the companies act.43. we have carefully considered the submissions made by the rival parties. we have also gone through the various documents filed before us during the course ..... of sale of shares to that concern. as we have mentioned above, it is not mandatory for the existence of a partnership firm to get itself registered with the registrar of firms and the genuineness of the partnership firm under the it act cannot be challenged simply on the ground that it is not registered with the registrar of firms, hon'ble supreme court ..... with the registrar of firms and another which is not so. it is also not mandatory for the existence of a partnership firm to get itself registered with the registrar of firms and the genuineness of the partnership firm under the it act cannot be challenged simply on the ground that it is not registered with the registrar of firms.32. regarding the payment .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 27 2001 (TRI)

Clifford Chance Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2002)82ITD106(Mum.)

..... act. the word "member" was also explained with reference to the definition as given in black's law dictionary.11. it was ..... shri dastur submitted that the word "member" refers to a partner because only a partner can be a "member of a partnership". learned counsel made reference to sections 5, 17(3), 34, 36 and 42(1) of the english partnership act, 1890 and section 37 of the indian partnership act, 1932. our attention was also invited on the provisions of section 64(1)(i) of the ..... that the reference to "partnership" in article 15 of the dta is a reference to "firm" or to a "partnership firm" as such. the employees of a firm cannot be regarded as its ..... demonstrated with reference to the sections of english partnership act and indian partnership act listed above that the word "partner" and "member" are inter-changeable. learned counsel argued .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 23 2006 (TRI)

Mishapar Investments Ltd. Vs. Ito

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2006)8SOT532(Mum.)

..... associates with the registrar of firms. in the case of dulichand laxminarayan v. cit (1956) 29 itr 535 (sc), the hon'ble supreme court held that section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, clearly requires the presence of three elements to constitute a firm namely: (i) that there must be an agreement entered into by two or more persons; (ii) that the ..... of partner under the head "partners current account". likewise, in the books of the assessee, this amount was shown to be recovered from the partnership firm. according to provisions of section 20 of the sales of goods act, if the goods are identified and parties intend to pass the property to the buyer, the payments can be deferred. but, in the instant ..... sale of shares to that concern. as we have mentioned above, it is not mandatory for the existence of a partnership firm to get itself registered with the registrar of firms and the genuineness of the partnership firm under the income tax act cannot be challenged simply on the ground that it is not registered with the registrar of firms. hon'ble supreme ..... current account of the partner and that is exactly as per the provisions of section 45(3) of the act. we also do not find any substance in the contention of the department that the sale has not been mentioned in the partnership deed because the firm was formed on 1-7-1997 and the sale under consideration had taken place on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 12 2008 (TRI)

Minnow Trading Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

..... where a partner is entitled to interest on the capital subscribed by him, such interest shall be payable only out of profits.the provisions of section 13(c) of the indian partnership act, 1932 being the law of the land, the partners of the firms are entitled to interest on the capital subscribed by them only when such interest could be paid ..... expenses on land development, which were capitalized by them as per their statement of accounts filed with the department.she contended that the provisions of section 13(c) of the indian partnership act, 1932 does not provide that the partners could not provide the allowance of interest on the amount of capital brought by them and in fact, in the case of ..... the capital contributing partner could be expected to take his stipulated interest. this seems to be the principle adopted by the indian legislature in section 13(c) of the indian partnership act and by parliament in section 24, clause 4 of the english partnership act. the law may recognize an exception to this rule where the contract expressly provides for payment of interest regardless of ..... interest on the capital subscribed by them as per the provisions of section 13(c) of the indian partnership act, 1932. learned counsel for the assessee contended that only exception to this legal provision of section 13(c) of the indian partnership act, 1932 is where the partnership deed executed by the partners specifically provides that partners shall be entitled to interest on the capital subscribed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 1986 (TRI)

L.M.S. Tool Room Vs. First Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1986)16ITD643(Mum.)

..... is mentioned as a party of the first part in the deed of partnership) is described in the opening portion of the said partnership deed as follows : shri narendra l. shah (acting as partner) for and on behalf of indian textile accessories co., the existing partnership concern registered under the indian partnership act, 1932.shri niranjan b. shah and shri surendra l. shah are the ..... persons who have signed the partnership deed for and on behalf of these two ..... companies, respectively. clause 7 which deals with profit and loss sharing ratio is as follows : 7. the profit and loss of the partnership ..... by the individual partner, the karta of the joint family, and by one partner each of the three firms. this deed of partnership was sought to be registered under section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922, the application being signed by the same five individuals. the supreme court held that no question could arise of the registration .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 1997 (TRI)

international Computers India Vs. Deputy Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1997)63ITD195(Mum.)

..... are entitled to 25 per cent share each of the profits in the appellant firm and periwal and co. (p.) ltd. has 50 per cent share of profit. under the indian partnership act, 1932, the partnership firm registered thereunder is neither a person nor a legal entity. it is merely a collective name for the individual members of the ..... 25 per cent and periwal and co. p.ltd. has the remaining 50 per cent share in the profits of the newly constituted partnership, messrs mahabir cold storage, at purnea. the new partnership also obtained registration under the indian income-tax filed voluntary returns and it was separately assessed for the assessment year 1960-61 and thereafter.in the assessment year 1959-60 ..... the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the tribunal holding that the conditions under section 33(1) of the income-tax act are satisfied, is legal and proper ?" the appellant-assessee is a registered partnership firm under a deed executed and registered on november 10, 1958, between prayagchand periwal and hanumanmal periwal and messrs periwal and co. p. ltd ..... .acquisition of ownership is a condition precedent for availing of the development rebate under section 33(1) of the act. it is now fairly clear from the statement of facts that the old and the new partnership firms are separately registered under the act and the old one was doing its business at calcutta and the new one at purnea. they have been .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 05 1999 (TRI)

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Associated Builders

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2000)72ITD273(Mum.)

..... at the time of dissolution only when there is no agreement or contract between the partners to the contrary, which is also the position recognised sky section 48 of the indian partnership act. therefore our decision is applicable equally to capital assets as well as stack-in-trade, provided there is a contract between the partners to value them at the time of ..... revenue authorities to discard the same and seek to tax the profit on the notional footing of the market price. in this connection the provisions of section 48 of the indian partnership act were also relied upon as also the order of the madras bench of the tribunal in ito v. preetham pipe syndicate [1993] 44 itd 665. as regards the existence of ..... the partners, the market value can be adopted for assessment purposes. in n. muhammad ussain sahib's case (supra) the question arose under section 48 of the partnership act. now section 48 of the partnership act provides for the mode of settlement of accounts between partners upon dissolution. the section provides for certain rules which are expressly stated to be subject to agreement by ..... absence of an agreement between the partners to the contrary, they can be valued on the basis of the market value at the time of dissolution. section 48 of the partnership act in fact clarifies or makes the position very clear.11. the other reason as to why it is difficult to understand the judgment of the supreme court as laying down .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 31 1984 (TRI)

D.M. Ghia Vs. Second Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1984)10ITD163(Mum.)

..... been drawings by a partner beyond the credits, it has to be treated as borrowals only. he relies on section 11 of the indian partnership act, 1932 and clause 9 of the partnership deed. now the issue is not, for the present, whether this represents borrowal or not. the issue is : from where the ..... the decision cited, therefore, need not be considered in detail.24. shri doshi has also made a reference to section 11 of the partnership act. this section merely states that the partners may determine their rights and duties for contract. this is also not very relevant. neither is clause 9 ..... observed : ...here the first thing that we must grasp is that a firm is not a legal person even though it has some attributes of personality. partnership is a certain relation between persons, the product of agreement to share the profits of a business. 'firm' is a collective noun, a compendious expression ..... has been treated somewhat like a current account. his income receipts are credited in that account. so too his drawings and payment of taxes. the partnership deed did not stipulate that partners would be debited with interest.nevertheless, interest has been charged on the debit balances. the accounting years are the ..... would be how the receipts which are credited to his account is to be treated we are of the opinion that section 60 of the indian contract act, 1872, containing the rules of appropriation would be applicable. this section says that where the debtor has omitted to intimate and there are no .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 20 1985 (TRI)

D.N. Dastur and Co. Vs. Eleventh Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1986)16ITD499(Mum.)

..... instant case before us is whether there is a firm which could be said to be by an agreement under the indian partnership act, 1932. 'partnership' as defined by section 4 of the indian partnership act, means the relationship between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried by all or any ..... of them acting for all. therefore, according to the definition, the requirements of a partnership are : (c) the business must be carried on by ..... their lordsdips of the supreme court had enunciated the requirements of a partnership as under : 8. in k.d. kamath & co.'s case (supra), the supreme court held that the legal requirements, under section 4 of the partnership act to constitute a partnership in law, are : (i) there must be an agreement ..... to share the profits or losses of the business; (ii) the business must be carried on by all the partners or any of them acting for all; and (iii) there ..... carry on practice and profession as chartered accountants, income-lax and sales tax consultants and management advisers. 4. the practice or profession of the partnership shall be carried on in premises nos. 140 and 144 on the 5th floor of the new stock exchange building at dalai street, bombay-400023 .....

Tag this Judgment!


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