Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat mumbai Year: 1981 Page 1 of about 2 results (0.077 seconds)

Sep 10 1981 (TRI)

Jitendra and Co. Vs. Third Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-10-1981

Reported in : (1982)1ITD891(Mum.)

..... given to the constituents of the business or to the bank, or that the firm is not registered under the partnership act, or that no separate capital account is opened, or that the partners who are former members of the disrupted hindu family continue to ..... to this conclusion as, according to him the examination of the partners indicated that persons other than shri mahesh d. shah knew practically nothing about the partnership business. the aac came to the same conclusion. he held thus- thus it is clear that a mere fact that the firm has complied with technical ..... ito, after giving the assessee an opportunity to cross-examine the partners, whose statements were recorded. the ito again came to the conclusion that the partnership is not genuine and this order has been confirmed by the aac. hence, the present appeals by the assessee.registration for the assessment year 1975-76 has ..... the ground that after recording the statements of the partners, the ito did not give any opportunity to the assessee before drawing an adverse inference that the partnership is not genuine. an appeal filed against this order by the department was dismissed by the tribunal. the matter was, therefore, decided afresh by the ..... the assessee was not a partner but his two minor sons were partners along with others. the firm was registered under section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922. but the income of the minor sons received from the second firm was treated by the department as the income of the assessee. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 1981 (TRI)

Dr. J.N. Mokashi Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-20-1981

Reported in : (1983)3ITD774(Mum.)

..... came to the conclusion that for the purpose of section 9, the expression 'business' includes profession particularly having regard to section 45 of the partnership act and also some decisions noticed by it at page 306 of the report. the supreme court approved the observations of rowlatt, j. in the ..... that though an advocate cannot be an active partner and that, at any rate, even if the advocate had actively participated in the business, partnership would not have been illegal. he, therefore, contended that when a partner was not educationally or academically qualified, it would be possible to ..... ' was liberally and widely interpreted by the supreme court and that the same meaning should also be applied here. he submitted that a partnership entered into between a doctor and his two sons who were only medical students was held to be entitled to registration by the madras ..... on the legislative history spanning the four decades of legislative enactments starting with section 16(3) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 ('the 1922 act'). it was pointed out that under the 1922 act, the words 'member-ship of a firm'employed therein included membership of a firm carrying on a profession ..... can-not be given a wider meaning to include 'managerial' or 'commercial' is that the performance of managerial or commercial services by an indian company for a foreign enterprise would amount to virtually managing or running the foreign company and remuneration obtained by running or managing a foreign company .....

Tag this Judgment!

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