Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: mumbai Year: 1973 Page 1 of about 11 results (0.027 seconds)

Nov 22 1973 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City Ii Vs. Raghavji Anandji and Co ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-22-1973

Reported in : [1975]100ITR246(Bom)

..... state that all contracts between a person a, and a and others would be invalid. reference may be made in this connection to the provisions of section 46 of the indian partnership act, 1932, where a partner may enforce as against the firm of which he is a partner certain contractual rights by means of a suit (without dissolution), whereas other can only ..... accordingly it was invalid. in my view, it would be clearly invalid inasmuch as the plurality of persons necessary to constitute the relationship of partners under section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, did not exist in that case.11. very strong reliance was placed by the learned counsel for the revenue on the decision of the privy council in lachhman das ..... authorities, or, if erroneously registered, the registration may be subsequently cancelled by the commissioner under his powers under section 33b of the act. the validity of a partnership would have to be decided with reference to the express provisions of the indian partnership act, and, in a case such as the one before us, with further reference to the principles of hindu law. if it ..... the registration. we have to consider whether that is the correct position in law.10. according to mr. hajarnavis, a partnership is a contractual relationship between persons who have agreed to do certain things as provided for under section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932. according to him, therefore, if there was such an agreement entered into by vandravan purshottam in his one .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 1973 (HC)

Godavari Pravara Canal Co-operative Purchase and Sale Union Ltd. Vs. K ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-14-1973

Reported in : AIR1974Bom52; 1974MhLJ75

..... india. as to the nature of the firm but the firm must be carrying on business in india. as to the nature of the firm under section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, the court observed that the word 'firm' or the 'firm name' was merely a compendious description of all the partners collectively. it followed, therefore that where a suit is ..... the partners of the dissolved firm 'haribhau sant & co.' in the very first paragraph the plaint alleges that there is a firm by name haribhau sant & company registered under the indian partnership act, 1932 and also discloses the registration number. further it gives the details of the partners, one being plaintiff himself and other being deceased haribhau. it alleges that the firm is ..... persons jointly is clearly a matter of debate. distinction however fine does exist and must be given effect to.11. the nature of partnership is referable to the provisions of section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, which states that 'partnership' is the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any or them ..... they carry on the business is an entity specifically recognized and treated as such by the provisions of the indian partnership act, giving rise to certain rights and obligations between the parties and also those who deal with such firms. the provision of that act provide ample machinery to indicate how the firm is constituted and how it works and how it can be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 17 1973 (HC)

Ramdas Khimji Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City I

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-17-1973

Reported in : [1974]97ITR361(Bom)

..... on which tax was at any time charged under the provisions of the indian income-tax act, 1918 (7 of 1918), is succeeded in such capacity by another person, the change not being merely a change in the constitution of a partnership, no tax shall be payable by the first mentioned person in respect of ..... the son transferred the business to a limited company, and for the assessment year 1948-49, he claimed relief under section 25 (4) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 and the question which arose was, whether on the facts stated above, there was a succession to the business within the terms of the said ..... facts and in the circumstances of the case, the firm of m/s. ramdas khimji bros. was entitled to relief under section 25 (4) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, in respect of the profits from its business for the period from october 1, 1951, to december 28, 1951, relevant to the assessment year 1953 ..... partners as a proprietary concern. 2. the said firm of ramdas khimji bros. claimed to be entitled to relief under section 25 (4) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, in respect of the profits from its business for the period from october 1, 1951, to december 28, 1951, the relevant assessment year being ..... the income from which had been charged to income-tax under the indian income-tax act of 1918. it was first charged to super-tax in 1920-21. the constitution of that firm was changed from time to time and some of the partnership deeds relating to the name are on record. on 11th december, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 20 1973 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Bombay City Ii Vs. Ramprasad Mehra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-20-1973

Reported in : [1975]100ITR468(Bom)

..... all income arising to any person of a settlement or disposition whether revocable or not, and whether effected before or after the commencement of the indian income tax (amendment) act, 1939 (vii of 1939), from assets remaining the property of the settler or disponer shall be deemed to be income of the settlor or disponer ..... and style of kishanchand bros. this firm is registered under section 26a of the act ramgopal a minor son, an unmarried minor daughter and a wife and they form a joint hindu ..... property into the common stock of the joint family property does not amount to a transfer so as to attract the provisions of the gift tax act, 1958.9. in view of these decisions the questions that arises for consideration in the present reference are concluded by the decisions which care ..... view that the income earned out of the shares was includible in the assessment of ramgopal and ramprasad under the provision of section 16 of the act. while assessing these two individuals ramgopal and ramprasad preferred appeals were herd by the two appellate assistant commissioner. these appeal were hard by the ..... ) of the indian income tax act 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') at the instance of the revenue.2. one balmukchand has five sons. two of them of them are ramgopal and ramprasad. the five sons of balmukchand and a son of one of the sons carry on business in partnership under the name .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 20 1973 (HC)

Deviprasad Kejriwal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Bombay

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-20-1973

Reported in : [1976]102ITR180(Bom)

..... there was a loss. on december 18, 1948, the assessee submitted a return declaring an income of rs. 7,752 plus share income from various partnership firms. on the basis of that return which was filed on december 18, 1948, the assessment was made on a total income of rs. 54, ..... 369 on march 23, 1949. this assessment, it appears, was required to be reopened twice under section 34 of the indian income-tax act, 1922. on the first occasion during reassessment proceeding the total income was determined at rs. 94,802 on november 24, 1952, while on the ..... is clear that the expression 'regular assessment' occurring in section 18a (9) would cover the cases of reassessment undertaken under section 34 (1) of the act. in our view, the two decisions on which reliance has been placed by mr. pandit are clearly distinguishable and they do not present any difficulty in interpreting ..... proceedings which were initiated by the income-tax officer by issuing a notice under section 18a (9)(a) read with section 28 (3) of the act after the first reassessment proceedings were completed but before the second reassessment proceedings were completed were perfectly valid in law.9. mr. pandit, appearing for the ..... and (3).......' 8. it is, therefore, clear to us that when reassessment starts with a notice under section 34 all the relevant provisions of the act apply as effectively as where assessment starts with a notice under section 22 (2) and section 18a (9) would certainly be attracted. on a proper .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 1973 (HC)

Kishandas Dilberdas Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City Ii

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-20-1973

Reported in : [1974]96ITR638(Bom)

..... supreme court has, inter alia, taken the view that the provisions of section 14, 15, 29, 32, 37, 38 and 48 of the partnership act, 1932, make it clear that whatever may be the character of the property which is brought in by the partners when the ..... permissible to the assessee to claim any depreciation for any of the two assessment year in question for the plant and machinery which were used in the partnership business during the relevant accounting periods. 12. the question, however, arises whether notwithstanding the fact that during the relevant accounting period for the two assessment ..... relevant accounting periods for the assessment years 1959-60 and 1960-61 all the plant and machinery formed part of the assets of the partnership and belonged to the partnership as such. thus, during the relevant accounting periods for both the assessment years the plant and machinery was not the property of the ..... succeeding years; and (c) the aggregate of all allowances in respect of depreciation made under this clause and clause (via) or under any act repealed hereby, or, under the indian income-tax act, 1886 (ii of 1886), shall, in no case, exceed the original cost to the assessee of the buildings, machinery, plant or furniture, ..... kantawala, c.j. 1. by this reference under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') the following two questions are referred for our determination at the instance of the assessee : '1. whether, on the facts and in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 27 1973 (HC)

J.S. Parkar Vs. V.B. Palekar and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-27-1973

Reported in : [1974]94ITR616(Bom)

..... on business of transporting iced fish, mangoes and other goods by sea from konkan ports to bombay in his own launches as also launched belonging to a partnership firm managed by him. at the material time he was the owner of a launch, 'lakshmi'. on april 24, 1961, the central excise authorities ..... on payment of fine. in the course of assessment proceedings the assessee claimed deduction of the penalty amount under section 10(2)(xv) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. the bombay high court negatived the contention holding that the penalty for infraction of law could not amount to any expenditure laid out ..... learned judges of the punjab and haryana high court on the ground that the deduction claimed therein was under section 10(2)(xv) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, while piara singh was claiming deduction under section 10(1) on the footing that the true profits from his illegal business of smuggling ..... the owner of the gold. the value of the gold is sought to be brought to income-tax under section 69 or section 69a of the indian income-tax act, 1961. 37. it has been the contention of the petitioner, therefore, that unless there was independent and legal proof of the 'investment' alleged ..... of fine. in the course of the assessment proceedings the assessee claimed deduction of this penalty amount under section 10(2)(xv) of the indian income-tax act 1922. the bombay high court negatived the claim holding that the penalty for infraction of law does not amount to any expenditure laid out or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 12 1973 (HC)

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Radheshyam Motilal Khandelwal and ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-12-1973

Reported in : AIR1974Bom228; 1974MhLJ319

..... m.r. radikar and mr. joshi for negotiating the settlement of the claim.3. the trail court found that the plaintiffs formed a partnership under the india partnership act, that plaintiff no. 1 radheshyam had entered into a contract of insurance of the rice mill with the defendant company. it further held ..... decree for rs. 16,494.80 passed against them in favour of the plaintiffs. the plaintiffs claimed to be partners of a partnership firm carrying on the business of million rice in the mill known as alibhai rice mills at gondia. admittedly, in november, 1959 plaintiff no. ..... is a reasonable provision in a policy of insurance against direct loss to specific property. (see also decisions referred to in mulla's indian contract and specific relief acts, ninth edition, page 295, under the heading 'limitation of time to enforce rights under a contract'). in our view, therefore, condition ..... under the policy should be referred to arbitration. they policy was not signed by both the parties, and having regard to section 27 of the arbitration act, 1889, which defined 'submission' as being a 'written agreement' to submit present or future difference to arbitration, and a 'written agreement' within ..... to forward to the controller of insurance. the almost perfected stage which the insurance business has reached and the statutory requirements of the insurance act clearly point out that an insurer has in his business standard policy are to be incorporated either at the instance of the insurer or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 01 1973 (HC)

Govindlal Bhikulal Maheshwari and ors. Vs. Firm Thakurdas Bhallabhadas ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-01-1973

Reported in : AIR1974Bom164; 1974MhLJ106

..... no. 2 who constituted a joint family trading firm of the name bhikulal madan mohan and that the suit was not barred under section 69 of the partnership act as the joint family firm did not require registration. the trial court accepted the case of the defendant no. 1 that he had paid the amount ..... (cir sup.) which was approved by the two court of chancery in (1901) 2 ch 160 in our view, there is a marked difference between the indian law and the english law so far as it deals with joint debtors or joint creditors. under the english law, the release of one of the debtors has ..... he was in law entitled to give a valid discharge to the defendant no. 1. the learned counsel relied on the provisions of section 38 of the indian contract act and the full bench decision of the madras high court in annapurnamma v. akkayya ilr(1913) mad 544 in which it was held, white, c.j ..... released form responsibility to the other joint promisor or promisors. the rule of survivorship is not recognised under the indian contract act as is clear from the provisions of section 42 and 44. so far as the indian law is concerned, the position is that in the case of a debt held by two joint creditors, ..... been placed, it would be proper to refer to the provisions of sections 38 and 45 of the indian contract act. according to the learned counsel for the defendant no.1, section 38 of the contract act clearly indicated that where there are several joint promises would be sufficient to discharge the promisor from the liability .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 1973 (HC)

The Union of India (Uoi) Vs. A.K. Mathiborwala

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-15-1973

Reported in : (1974)76BOMLR659

..... that the said information about blacklisting should not be communicated to the said firm.3. the respondents are citizens of india and carry on business in partnership at bombay in the name and style of messrs. v.k. mithiborwala and co. (hereinafter referred to as the firm.) the business of the said ..... cases were decided by division benches and in both of them the petitioners were the same, i.e. a company which was incorporated under the indian companies act, 1913. in the first khosla case a blacklisting order was passed and in the second there was no such direct order but the high court ..... had refused to accept the highest bid made at the auction sale of country liquor shops. the supreme court held that the bihar and orissa excise act (act no. ii of 1915) expressly conferred such power on the government and even apart from that it was open to the government as the owner ..... . this apart, the ministry of works, housing and supply (department of supply) is responsible for keeping an upto date list of blacklisted firms and also acts as the coordinating ministry for purpose of reviewing doubtful or marginal cases of blacklisting orders (see clause (7) of the code). further, it is common ..... the impugned order accepting the bid of a rival contractor violated the provisions of a specific rule framed by the state government under the relevant act which regulated the procedure for granting the exclusive privilege of conducting a ferry in one case and of supplying country liquor in the other. thus .....

Tag this Judgment!


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