Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: kolkata Page 1 of about 886 results (0.039 seconds)

Aug 24 1979 (HC)

Mathurdas Govardhandas Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : [1980]125ITR470(Cal)

..... on the 19th april, 1965, and the said deed was executed on the 7th may, 1965, and is good evidence of the contemporaneous intention of the partners.27. under the indian partnership act, on the dissolution of a firm, the partners or their representatives have a right to have the surplus in the dissolved firm, if any, determined and obtained their respective shares ..... be the contingency, a firm will not stand dissolved under section 42 of the indian partnership act. the remaining partners or some of them may carry on the business of the firm by themselves or along with other persons inducted as new partners. this will be a ..... the debts and liabilities of the firm, and to have the surplus distributed among the partners or their representatives according to their rights.' 15. from the aforementioned sections of the indian partnership act, clear indications are found as to the circumstances under which a firm is reconstituted and also when a firm stands dissolved. if there be a contract to the contrary, whatever ..... a firm. the concept of dissolution, therefore, has to be understood in the context of general law as also of the indian partnership act.20. we do not find any conflict between the provisions of the i.t. act and those in the indian partnership act in construing the nature, scope, effectand incidents of dissolution of a firm for the purpose of assessment of a firm to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 27 1975 (HC)

Narayan Prasad Vijaivargiya Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : [1976]102ITR748(Cal)

..... fullfledged partner and given all the rights and subjected to all the liabilities of a partner. hence, according to the learned counsel, the deed goes beyond section 30 of the indian partnership act, 1932, and registration was rightly refused. learned counsel has relied on the case of commissioner of income-tax v. dwarkadas khetan & co. he has also referred to the cases in ..... was refused on the ground that the clause relating to the share of losses by the minor contravened section 30(3) of the indian partnership act, 1932. it was held by the kerala high court that section 30(3) of the indian partnership act only prohibited the imposing of any personal liability on the minors; all that it did, in effect, was to provide that the ..... messrs. hariprasad madanlal vijaivargiya of akra phatak, p.o., bartala, district 24-parganas (as also of akra station, p.o. batanagar, dist. 24-parganas) registered under the indian partnership act, 1932, with the registrar of firms, in july, 1957, the registration number being 32347 (memo. no. 34707) and (7) shri nanda kishore vijaivargiya, a minor son of late madanlal vijaivargiya, ..... make him a full partner. in our view the deed cannot be said to go beyond the provisions of section 30 of the indian partnership act, 1932, and, therefore, it cannot be regarded as invalid. as, in our opinion, the partnership deed dated november 9, 1959, is a valid document refusal of its registration cannot be uphold. in the aforesaid view of the matter .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 04 2008 (HC)

Ganpat Lal Pawan Kumar and anr. Vs. Uttar Pradesh State Spinning Co. L ...

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : 2008(4)CHN694

..... application out of which the present mandamus appeal arises may be summed up thus:1) the appellant no. 1 is a partnership firm duly registered under the indian partnership act and carrying on business at the address given in the cause-title of the application. the appellant no. 2 carries on ..... the respondent no. 1 is a corporation within the meaning of the act of 1972. according to the appellants, by an agreement dated july 2, 1997, the respondent no. 1 appointed the appellant no. 1, a registered partnership firm, as its depot handling agent for handling the depot-functions and ..... the first time by the appellants that the certificate was not in conformity with the provisions of the uttar pradesh amendment of the revenue recovery act, 1890, mr. chatterjee, the learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 1, vehemently contended that there being no foundation ..... nominee who would decide the matter as the sole arbitrator. proceedings relating to arbitration, it was provided, would be governed by the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996. in paragraph 32 of the agreement, it was provided that all amounts payable under the agreement by the appellant no. 1 to the ..... by the respondent no. 1 by filing affidavit-in-opposition thereby justifying its action in initiating the recovery proceeding under the provisions of the act of 1972. it was specifically alleged that there was existence of an arbitration agreement between the parties and if the appellants wanted to dispute .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 2008 (HC)

Sri Gaur Karuna Dey and ors. Vs. Sri Nemai Dey and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : 2008(3)CHN590,2(2008)CLT537

..... retirement at all in the suit. still then when the learned appeal court discussed the legality of such retirement after analyzing the provision contained in section 32 of the indian partnership act, this court feels the necessity of assessing the correctness of such findings of the learned appeal court herein.35. for proper appreciation of the provision contained in of ..... the said business until such accounts are settled and value of the plaintiffs' share are paid in view of section 37 of the indian partnership act, 1932.26. mr. roy chowdhury further submitted that since admittedly the partnership business was started by raising loan from bank and various financial institutions, public notice notifying retirement of the plaintiffs should have been issued ..... the said appeal the learned appeal court held that the retirement of the plaintiffs from the partnership business was neither effected as per the provision contained in the partnership agreement nor was effected in terms of the provision contained in section 32 of the indian partnership act as public notice regarding such retirement was not given. the learned appeal court held that ..... from their date of retirement i.e. 1st january, 1995.19. mr. sahoo further submitted that the learned appeal court wrongly construed the provision of section 32 of the partnership act. referring to a decision of the hon'ble supreme court in the case of pamuru vishnu vinobh reddy v. chillakuru chandra sekhara reddy reported in : [2003]2scr57 mr. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 24 1984 (HC)

Commissioner of Gift-tax Vs. Nani Gopal Mondal

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : (1984)41CTR(Cal)64,[1984]150ITR469(Cal)

..... firm and the right of a partner in respect thereof is applicable to the instant case. in this connection, it may be mentioned that according to section 14 of the indian partnership act, property of a firm includes goodwill of the business. further, according to section 29(2), if a partner transfers his interest and the transferring partner ceases to be a partner ..... the goodwill passes to the transferee or the legal representatives.24. in the case of cit v. bhupinder singh atwal : [1981]128itr67(cal) , it was observed 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 a firm as such has no separate rights of its own in ..... his legal representatives will apply to the goodwill as well as to other assets.20. in addanki narayanappa v. bhaskara krishnappa, : [1966]3scr400 , after referring to several sections of the indian partnership act, the supreme court observed as follows (p. 1303) :' from a perusal of these provisions, it would be abundantly clear that whatever may be the character of the property which is ..... to receive the share of the assets of the firm to which the transferring partner is entitled to. it further appears that under the proviso to section 53 of the indian partnership act, in case of dissolution, a partner or his representative may buy the goodwill of the firm and, under section 55(1) of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 29 1976 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Cossipore Properties

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : 80CWN571,[1977]107ITR965(Cal)

..... is that the assessee consisting of the two persons do nothing but manage their existing property. he relied on section 4 of the indian partnership act which defined a partnership as the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business. section 2(b) of the same ..... . both the indian statute and the english law made it clear that persons may be joint or co-owners, but the same would not preclude them from carrying on business with the assets which were originally in joint ownership. he contended that what explanation 1 to section 6 of the partnership act provided was that ..... where the property itself without any further activity on the part of the owners produced profits and the owners qua owners agreed to share such profits without any further activity on their part, then certainly no partnership would arise. he further contended that in ..... well-known treatises of lindley and underhill. the concept 'business' has been analysed at page 10 of the 13th edition of lindley on partnership as follows :'by section 45 of the act, 'business' includes 'every trade occupation, or profession'. thus, virtually any commercial activity or adventureamounts to a business for the purposes of ..... dipak kumar sen, j.1. this is a reference under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, which has been initiated by the commissioner of income-tax, west bengal-iii, calcutta. the facts found and/or admitted as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 15 1967 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hind Construction Ltd.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : [1970]78ITR664(Cal)

..... of any transfer or sale in the instant case because the firm is not a juristic person. the partnership has been defined in section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, which reads as follows:'partnership is the relation between persons who have agreed to-share the profits of a business carried on by ..... all or any of them acting; for all.persons who have entered into partnership with one another are called individually 'partners' ..... it is in that sense that mr. d. n. pritt in the latest edition of pollock & mulla's the sale . of goods act and the partnership act, 3rd edition, has made the followingobservations:'a firm is currently regarded as something distinct from its members; they may have claims on the firm's ..... it is not and here english and roman laws are in accord. the latter held the persons engaged in ordinary partnership (societas) or joint adventure are just so many individuals acting together under contract; the property they contribute oracquire is their joint property; every debt due to the firm belongs in ..... cost of the building and its written down value would be deemed profits under the second proviso to section 10(2)(vii) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. the supreme court discussed a large number of cases and, in deciding the appeal in favour of the revenue, came to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 06 2003 (HC)

Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. Durga Crane and anr.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : (2003)2CALLT122(HC)

..... even if the partnership firm stood dissolved on account of the letter written by shri bansal on 6th february, 1992, the authority of each partner to bind the firm and ..... be considered whether mr. banerjee's said submission can stand scrutiny in view of the fact that the petitioner company had not been formerly informed that the partnership had been dissolved giving rise to a situation contemplated in section 47 of the indian partnership act, 1932. it is also to be seen whether in view of the provisions of section 47 of the aforesaid ..... act, the petitioner company could have terminated the contract without ascertaining as to whether the other partner was ready and willing to complete the transaction under the contract.27 ..... scrutiny, particularly when the learned arbitrator had acted well within his jurisdiction and in terms of the contract.22. mr. saha submitted that the question regarding dissolution of the partnership had been duly considered by the learned arbitrator who relied on the tender form itself and also on the provisions of section 47 of the indian partnership act, 1932, to come to a finding that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 05 1980 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-ii Vs. Bhupinder Singh Atwal

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : (1981)20CTR(Cal)291,[1981]128ITR67(Cal)

..... supreme court was again reiterated by the supreme court in the case of malabar fisheries co. v. cit : [1979]120itr49(sc) , wherein the supreme court held that a partnership firm under the indian partnership act, 1932, was not a distinct legal entity apart from the partners constituting it and equally in law a firm as such had no separate rights of its own in ..... by the supreme court. in the case of malabar fisheries co. v. cit : [1979]120itr49(sc) , the supreme court referred to lindley on partnership and observed at page 59 of the report that a partnership firm under the indian partnership act, 1932, was not a distinct legal entity apart from the partners constituting it and equally in law a firm as such had no separate ..... rights of its own in the partnership assets and when one talked about the firm's property or firm's assets all that was meant ..... the partnership assets and when one talked of a firm's property or the firm's assets all that was meant was the property or assets in which all partners .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 08 1994 (HC)

B.C. Saha Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : (1994)1CALLT419(HC)

..... this contention cannot be upheld for the reasons stated below.6. sub-section (2) of section 19 of the indian partnership act imposes certain restrictions upon the partners' implied authority. these are statutory restrictions. hence these are binding upon all partners dealing with the ..... 1993. in that deed also there is no provision for submitting a dispute between the partnership firm and a third party to arbitration. the learned state advocate relying upon section 19(2)(a) of the indian partnership act has submitted that the reference to arbitration on the basis of the arbitration clause of ..... was introduced by the first time :'20. that all disputes and differences and questions whatsoever which shall either during the continuence of the partnership or otherwise arise between the partners or their respective representatives or between any partner and the representatives of the other partners touching these presents ..... one, otherwise to three arbitrators, one to be appointed by each partner and the arbitration shall be governed by the provisions of the indian arbitration act or any other enactment relating thereto for the time being in force'.5. it appears from a plain reading of the above paragraph that ..... there was no provision for submitting a dispute between a third party and the partnership firm to arbitration. upon the death of shri b.c. saha, .....

Tag this Judgment!


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