Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Page 4 of about 35,901 results (0.100 seconds)

Apr 22 1996 (HC)

Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hassan Chand and Sons

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : [1997]224ITR244(Raj)

..... and to pay to the guardian of his estate an equal share in the profits of the new firm in accordance with the provisions contained in section 37 of the indian partnership act, 1932. the guardian was not to bear the losses which were to be shared equally by the two remaining partners who were to carry on the business. shri abdul razaq ..... invalid merely because the continuing partners and the guardian of the heirs of the deceased noor mohammed, made efforts to give effect to the provisions of section 37 of the indian partnership act.13. regarding the question as to whether payments made to the guardian of the heirs of the deceased shri noor mohammed were deductible as a charge in arriving at the ..... . he held the view that the guardian of the heirs of the deceased partner constituted the third partner in the firm and, therefore, the provisions of section 37 of the indian partnership act, 1932, did not apply to the case.10. having lost its case before the income-tax officer and the appellate assistant commissioner for both the years, the assessee-firm approached ..... december 31, 1958, no profits were attributable to the use of his share in the properties of the firm so as to attract the provisions of section 57 of the indian partnership act, 1932, to the facts of the present case. the income-tax officer, therefore, held that neither the application was signed by all the partners nor were the profits and losses .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 1964 (HC)

N.Sp.N. Nagappa Chettiar Firm, Madurai Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1965Mad424; [1965]56ITR569(Mad)

..... the previous year; and (2), before the end of the previous year in any other case; (b) where the firm is registered under the indian partnership act, 1932, or where the deed of partnership is registered under the indian registration act, 1908 before the end of the previous year of that firm; and (c) where the application is for renewal of registration under rule 6, ..... year of assessment subsequent thereto be made......... (a) where the firm is not registered under the indian partnership act, 1932, or where the deed of partnership is not registered under the indian registration act, 1908 and the application for registration is being made for the first time under the act, (1) within a period of six months of the constitution of the firm or before the ..... assessee could make the application before the end of the previous year. in the other class of cases where the firm is registered under the partnership act or where the deed of partnership is registered under the indian registration act, the application should be made before the end of the previous year.looking at the rule closely, it is seen that there are only ..... really two classes. where the firm had been already in existence in the past, whether it was registered under the partnership act or the deed of partnership had been registered .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 25 1968 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Janab N. Hyath Batcha Sahib

Court : Chennai

Reported in : [1969]72ITR528(Mad)

..... does not appear to cloud or destroy the identity of the partners whose rights and liabilities vis-a-vis each other are governed by the terms of the partnership and the provisions of the indian partnership act. the members of a firm, from a certain point of view, therefore, remain as co-owners in a limited sense and subject to the terms of the ..... the property, though it is true b, by reason of the transaction, becomes entitled to certain rights which are regulated by the terms of the agreement of partnership, as well as the provisions of the indian partnership act. where the making over of tangible assets, movable or immovable, is by a certain set of persons to an incorporated company in which the same set ..... conclusion on this reasoning. apart from the foregoing, there are other weighty reasons for concurring with the view of the tribunal. section 14 of the indian partnership act shows the different process or methods by which a firm of partnership may come to possess property. the section says ' the property of the firm includes all property and rights and interests in property originally brought ..... in which two or more persons combine their efforts and conjointly apply the same to a commercial or business activity with a view to make profit. section 4 of the indian partnership act makes this explicit and says that a ' partnership ' is the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 24 1969 (HC)

Pl. Rm. Arunachalam Chettiar Vs. Controller of Estate Duty

Court : Chennai

Reported in : [1970]75ITR28(Mad)

..... in the instant reference.3. the law seems to be so well settled now that it is impossible to accept mr. thyagarajan's proposition mentioned above. section 29 of the indian partnership act, 1932, which deals with the rights of transfer of a partner's interest, lays down by its second sub-section that, if a firm were dissolved the transferee from an ..... is nothing on record to show that there was anything like an administration of the firm's assets and liabilities involving the various steps contemplated by section 48 of the indian partnership act, 1932, before the residue was divided between the sharers, and from this standpoint too, the deceased's interest in his one-fourth share in the firm's assets was ..... of each partner is, in the words of lindley : 'his proportion of the partnership assets after they have been all realised and converted into money, and all the ..... and particularly the following passage in it:'it is abvious that the act contemplates complete liquidation of the assets of the partnership as a preliminary to the settlement of accounts between partners upon dissolution of the firm and it will, therefore, be correct to say that, for the purposes of the indian partnership act, and irrespective of any mutual agreement between the partners, the share .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 24 1953 (HC)

Ganeshnarayan Jagdamba Prasad Vs. Indian Textile Syndicate

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1954Bom91; (1953)55BOMLR857; ILR1954Bom304

..... once he has obtained a decree against a firm, there is an obligation under the partnership law upon each partner to discharge the partnership debt. he says that even in the case of a dissolved partnership under section 49, indian partnership act the obligation of the erstwhile partners to discharge the partnership debt continues, and therefore if a creditor of a firm calls upon the firm to ..... discharge its debt, the liability to discharge that debt is upon each and every partner and the failure to discharge that debt constitutes an act of insolvency on the ..... part of each partner. there is no dispute as to the substantive law embodied in the partnership act and nobody suggests that there is no obligation upon a partner even of a dissolved partnership to discharge the debts of the partnership in the winding up. but what is overlooked by mr. purshottam is that what we have to consider in this ..... it says is that 'any two or more persons being partners or any person carrying on business under a partnership name, may take proceedings or be proceeded against under this act in the name of the firm.'therefore, it is open under the indian law to a creditor to adjudicate a firm insolvent. instead of proceeding against two or three partners individually, he .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 16 1998 (HC)

Varadachary and Company, Hyderabad Vs. Superiniteding Engineer (Operat ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 1999(3)ALD599; 1999(3)ALT431

..... of the earlier partnership deeds. one such partnership is dated 29-9-1990. under the clause (v) of the said partnership, it is stated that the partnership shall be at will. the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the said partnership being a partnership at will under section 43 of the indian partnership act, the same ..... may be dissolved by any partner by giving notice in writing to all the partners of his intention to dissolve the firm. the respondent counsel has brought to my notice, a notice issued by one of the partners dated 5-7-1996 intimating the board that the partnership ..... the firm by that notice w.e.f. 5-7-1996.6. having regard to these circumstances, the legal position would be that the partnership that entered into agreement stood dissolved with effect from 5-7-1996. as i have already noted above, a separate suit is also filed ..... consequence, as long as the petitioner-firm is ready to execute the work, in terms of thecontract of the year 1987 and the said partnership is not dissolved and it is still continuing by reconstitution from time to time. he further urged that at any rate the said contract ..... by the concerned person for rendition of the accounts. in these circumstances, it cannot be said that the partnership that entered into an agreement with the board still existed as on today.7. now the other short point for my consideration would be, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 20 2005 (HC)

Sudex, Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Gift-tax

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : (2007)210CTR(AP)529; [2007]290ITR511(AP)

..... transfer much less gift in the said transaction.4. the learned commissioner (cgt) being of the view that under the partnership act, minors cannot be taken as partners, examined the matter in the light of sections 30 and 32 of the indian partnership act, 1932, and held that the case law applicable to the retirement of partners is not applicable to the minor withdrawing from ..... make certain observations on the basis of the well-settled position in law with regard to the partnership firm and the rights of the partners with respect to the assets of the firm.12. it is by now well-settled that the partnership firm under the indian partnership act, 1932, is not a distinct legal entity apart from the partners constituting it. a firm has ..... no separate rights of its own in the partnership assets. in law, any reference to the firm's property or firm's assets is in ..... to partners is not applicable to the case of a minor withdrawing from the benefits of partnership. let us, therefore, consider the correctness of the said conclusions. section 30 of the indian partnership act, 1932, to the extent relevant, is extracted hereunder:30. minors admitted to the benefits of partnership.--(1) a person who is a minor according to the law to which he is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 28 1977 (SC)

Vasantrao Alias Baburao and anr. Vs. Shyamrao and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1977SC2021; [1977]47CompCas666(SC); (1977)4SCC9; [1978]1SCR218; 1977(9)LC499(SC)

..... can only wound up by the court. admittedly this is not a case of volume winding up or winding up subject to the supervision of the chapter vi of the indian partnership act, 1932 also contains persons for the dissolution of a firm and its winding up on dissolution the argument for the appellants is that the special provisions of x of the ..... not relevant for the present purpose. it is clear that provisions for winding up of the affairs of a firm which vi of the indian partnership act contains besides provision-, dissolution of partnership are left untouched by section 59 companies a the cases cited in support of the respective contentions of the parties are not really on the point under consideration except the ..... to entertain some of the claims made in the suit, because section 590 of the companies act makes it clear that part x of the does not affect the operation of the indian partnership act. s 590 states:5. saving and construction of enactments conferring power to w partnership, association or company in certain cases.nothing in this part shall affect the operation of ar ..... . enactment which provides for any partnership, associatic or company being wound up, or being wound up as a cor .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 2003 (SC)

Pamuru Vishnu Vinodh Reddy Vs. Chillakuru Chandrasekhara Reddy and ors ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2003SC1614; 2003(2)ALLMR(SC)373; 2003(2)SCALE242; (2003)3SCC445; [2003]2SCR57; 2003(2)LC820(SC)

..... in payment of his financial entitlement, he is entitled to interest at the rate of six per cent per annum in the property of the firm. section 37 of the indian partnership act also says that in the case of an outgoing partner, he is entitled to such share of the profits made since he ceased to be a partner as may be ..... court itself to decide date taking into account that his share was not paid till now. .....'9. we think it necessary to notice sections 32, 37 and 48 of the indian partnership act which read:-'32. retirement of a partner - (1) a partner may retire,- (a) with the consent of all the other partners,(b) in accordance with an express agreement by the ..... the said judgment in a.s. no. 481/1979 read as under:-'once we hold that the retirement was obtained by consent of all partners section 32(a) of the partnership act is attracted and a retirement with the consent of all the other partners can be effected without dissolution. the failure on the part of the remaining partners to settle the ..... . such disputes are to be resolved keeping in view the facts of each case having dur regard to section 37 of the act. section 48 deals with the mode of settlement of accounts between the partners after dissolution of the partnership firm.10. in this backdrop, now we take up the question for consideration set out above.11. the findings as recorded .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 08 1996 (SC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh Vs. M/S. B. Posetty and Co.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 1996IAD(SC)450; 1996VIIIAD(SC)225; AIR1996SC1091; I(1996)BC466(SC); [1996]220ITR216(SC); [1996]223ITR333(SC); JT1996(1)SC153; JT1996(10)SC100; 1996(4)KarLJ221; 1996(1)SCALE

..... a part of the profits of the main abkari business. and if that was not so, and it was merely a financing agreement, the sub-partnership would fail on the touchstone of section 4 of the indian partnership act as then there would be no agreement to share the profits of business. as the profits of the business to be shared by the sub ..... of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all.' he submitted that even assuming as this court in degaon ..... partner but the court had not considered the moot question whether such sub-partnership was merely a loan transaction or a financialagreement and if it was merely a financial agreement whether it could ever constitute a partnership within the meaning of section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932 which reads as under : 'partnership' is the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits ..... ganga reddy (supra) held that this sub-partnership was merely a financing agreement or .....

Tag this Judgment!


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