Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Sorted by: old Court: rajasthan Year: 1999 Page 1 of about 3 results (0.042 seconds)

Feb 25 1999 (HC)

Dharampal and Smt. Pushpa Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-25-1999

Reported in : 1999CriLJ3110

..... of the firm are not mentioned. the petitioners have brought on record a copy of the entry of the register under section 67 of the indian partnership act issued by the office of registrar of firms, a reading of which makes it clear that on 1-4-78 sri chand and dasu mai ..... checking.7. simply because ashok kumar, chhogamal and sunita have been discharged by the trial court, it cannot be presumed that the two petitioners constituted the partnership firm. the burden to establish that the petitioners were the partners of the firm m/s. narendra & co., udaipur, lay on the prosecution. the prosecution ..... p-15. mr. thakur pointing out that in the complaint it has nowhere been stated that the petitioners were incharge and were responsible to the partnership firm for the conduct of business urged that the proceedings against them are abuse of the process of the court and should be quashed.5. learned ..... was ordered that charges shall be framed against dharampal, pushpa devi and sri chand under section 146(1) read with section 3 of the e. c. act. however, by the subsequent order d/- 21-4-84 the trial court reversed its earlier order and discharged sri chand also. it is not understood, as ..... of the proceedings pending against them in the court of addl. chief judicial magistrate, udaipur under section 7 read with section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955.2. the relevant facts of the case are these. shri khema ram vishnoi, enforcement inspector on 18-11-79 intercepted a tanker of kerosene .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 1999 (HC)

Preeti Parihar and ors. Vs. Mali Sansthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-03-1999

Reported in : 2000(1)WLC654; 1999(1)WLN439

..... thought fit to prefer the claim founded on alleged tenancy. in order, the court may properly adjudicate the real character of the parties and the real partnership between them, it is necessary that all relevant facts should b before the court.11. for the above mentioned reasons, i do not find any ..... . therefore, this expression will have to be interpreted in view of other relevant provisions including the provisions contained in the indian evidence act. sections 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the evidence act point out what facts would be treated as relevant, even though, they may not be the fact in issue. a ..... totality of circumstances brought to its notice. the definitions of the expression 'proved' 'disproved' and 'not proved' given in section 3 of the evidence act clearly show that a fact is said to be proved when, after considering the matters before it to exist, or considers its existence so probable that ..... must be complete and if the chain is broken, then the circumstantial evidence may not be sufficient to arrive at a certain conclusion. the evidence act, therefore, permits the parties to produce all relevant facts before the court whether they are or they are not facts in issue, so that the ..... category of relevant facts, even though, they cannot be called facts in issue. in my humble opinion, every fact, which is relevant under the evidence act will have to be regarded as a 'necessary fact' so far as the adjudication by court is concerned, even though, such fact may not be a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 24 1999 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. JaIn Construction Co. and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Sep-24-1999

Reported in : [2000]245ITR527(Raj)

..... of the assessee for salary and interest payable to the partners. keeping in view, the amended provisions of section 260a of the act of 1961, the tribunal examined the partnership deed and found that the claim of the assessee for interest on capital contribution by the partners and salary to working partners is ..... this clause to the partner during the previous year relevant to the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of april, 1993, the terms of the partnership deed may, at any time during the said previous year, provide for such payment. explanation 1--where an individual is a partner in a firm on ..... working partner, or of interest to any partner, which, in either case, is not authorised by, or is not in accordance with, the terms of the partnership deed ; or (iii) any payment of remuneration to any partner who is a working partner, or of interest to any partner, which, in either case, ..... ., d. b. income-tax reference application no. 12 of 1998 (cit v. jain construction co.) are stated in brief.3. the assessee, a registered partnership firm, filed its return for the assessment year 1993-94 in respect of the accounting period of 1992-93 declaring an income of rs. 17,980. on ..... decision of the tribunal.6. we have considered the rival contentions. section 260a is the substitute of the original section 10(4)(b) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. as the provision existed, in each case it was required to be determined whether payment made by way of interest salary, commission or .....

Tag this Judgment!

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