Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Sorted by: recent Court: guwahati Page 1 of about 132 results (0.023 seconds)

Aug 29 2007 (HC)

Radha Krishna Jalan Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Guwahati

..... income for the purpose of the it act, 1961, irrespective of the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932. as stated hereinbefore, a sub-partnership has been recognized in india and registered as a partnership firm under the it act though the term has not been defined in the indian partnership act, 1932. a partnership firm cannot become a partner in another partnership firm for the purpose of the indian partnership act, 1932 since a firm is ..... not a person under this act and is, therefore, not ..... of a firm must sign the application for registration. since a firm is not a partner under the indian partnership act, 1932, the tribunal held that going by the definition of 'partnership' in the partnership act, the sub-partnership in the instant case could not enter into any partnership for the reason that one partner of such firm signing on behalf of the firm would not meet the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 2007 (HC)

P. Kumar and Associates Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. and ors.

Court : Guwahati

..... have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. 2. in the first writ petition, the petitioner has described itself as a partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act, 1932, but in the second writ petition it has described itself as a proprietorship concern. 3. the petitioner, in response to the notice inviting tender (nit), from resourceful ..... above, the petitioner itself is not sure of its identity. while in the first writ petition being wp(c) no. 4569/2006 it has described itself as a partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act, 1932, but in the second writ petition it has identified itself as a proprietorship firm owned by its proprietor sri pradip kumar, who in the first writ petition ..... participate in the fresh tender process, but has questioned the validity of the same in respect of the rates etc.21. the respondent authority in its impugned decision has solely acted on thecentral vigilance commission guidelines referred to above. during the course ofhearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said guidelinescirculated vide annexure-r/1 letter dated 24.8 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 2005 (HC)

M.S. Associates, Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Guwahati

..... of 2000 :(a) the case of the petitioner in this writ petition is, in brief, as follows :the petitioner, m/s. m. s. associates, is a partnership firm, duly registered under the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1931 with smt. jyoti limbu and smt. tilmaya chong as its two partners, having its registered office at connaught place, new delhi, and branch office at ..... the possession of the revenue is quite immaterial. in maharaj kumar kamal singh v. cit : [1959]35itr1(sc) , the supreme court, while construing section 34(1)(b) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, has held that the word 'information' appearing therein should be treated to mean not only facts or factual materials, but should also include information as to the true ..... valuable article or thing represents either wholly or partly income or property which has not been, or would not be, disclosed for the purposes of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or this act (hereinafter in this section referred to as the undisclosed income or property),then,--(a) the director general or director or the chief commissioner or commissioner, as ..... not, produce or cause to be produced, any books of account or other documents which will be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under the indian income-tax act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or under this act, or(c) any person is in possession of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing and such money, bullion, jewellery or other .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 2005 (HC)

M.S. Associates, Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Guwahati

Reported in : (2005)196CTR(Gau)318,[2005]275ITR502(Gauhati)

..... of 2000 :(a) the case of the petitioner in this writ petition is, in brief, as follows :the petitioner, m/s. m. s. associates, is a partnership firm, duly registered under the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1931 with smt. jyoti limbu and smt. tilmaya chong as its two partners, having its registered office at connaught place, new delhi, and branch office at ..... the possession of the revenue is quite immaterial. in maharaj kumar kamal singh v. cit : [1959]35itr1(sc) , the supreme court, while construing section 34(1)(b) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, has held that the word 'information' appearing therein should be treated to mean not only facts or factual materials, but should also include information as to the true ..... valuable article or thing represents either wholly or partly income or property which has not been, or would not be, disclosed for the purposes of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or this act (hereinafter in this section referred to as the undisclosed income or property),then,--(a) the director general or director or the chief commissioner or commissioner, as ..... not, produce or cause to be produced, any books of account or other documents which will be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under the indian income-tax act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or under this act, or(c) any person is in possession of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing and such money, bullion, jewellery or other .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 2005 (HC)

M.S. Associates Vs. Uoi

Court : Guwahati

..... 2000 :(a) the case of the petitioner in this writ petition is, in brief, as follows.4. the petitioner, m/s. m.s. associates, is a partnership firm, duly registered under the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1931 with smt. jyoti limbu and smt. tilmaya chong as its two partners, having its registered office at connaught place, new delhi, and branch office at ..... the possession of the revenue is quite immaterial. in maharaj kumar kamal singh v. cit : [1959]35itr1(sc) , the supreme court, while construing section 34(1)(b) of the indian income tax act, 1922, has held that the word 'information' appearing therein should be treated to mean not only facts or factual materials, but should also include information as to the true ..... valuable article or thing represents either wholly or partly income or property which has not been, or would not be, disclosed for the purposes of the indian income tax act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or this act (hereinafter in this section referred to as the undisclosed income or property), then,(a) the director general or director or the chief commissioner or commissioner, as ..... not, produce or cause to be produced, any books of account or other documents which will be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under the indian income-tax act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or under this act, or(c) any person is in possession of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing and such money, bullion, jewellery or other .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 21 2005 (HC)

Bata India Ltd. and ors. Vs. United Publishers and anr.

Court : Guwahati

..... of the plaintiff nos. 1 and 2, i in the suit. in support of his contention mr. dey, learned senior counsel, has placed reliance on section 42(c) of the indian partnership act, 1932 and has submitted that a firm is dissolved by the death of a partner and, therefore, no decree can be passed in favour of the plaintiff no. 1 and ..... -tax, madhya pradesh, nagpur and bhandra, nagpur v. seth govindram sugar mills, reported in : [1965]57itr510(sc) , mr. dey has submitted that section 42(c) of the partnership act can appropriately he applied to a partnership where there was more than two partners and if one of them dies, the firm is dissolved, but if there is a contract to the contrary, surviving ..... the suit filed by the plaintiffs in the name of plaintiff no. 1 still survives on the death of the plaintiff no. 3, the partnership firm being consisted of two partners.12. section 45(1) of the partnership act provides that a firm is dissolved by the death of a partner. in commissioner of income-tax (supra) the apex court has held that ..... in the matter relating to the income-tax. the question before the apex court was whether on the death of one of the partners the partnership firm stood dissolved by virtue of section 42(c) of the partnership act. there was no occasion to consider the provisions of rule 4, of order 30, of the cpc by the apex court in the said .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 31 2004 (HC)

M.S. Associates Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Guwahati

..... .facts in w. p. (c) no. 1552 of 2000:4. the petitioner, m/s. m. s. associates, is a partnership firm duly registered under the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932. smt. jyoti limbu and smt. tilmaya chong are the two partners of the firm having its registered office at connaught place, ..... road, silpukhuri, guwahati, has been disputed by the respondents in paragraph 3 of their affidavit-in-opposition. no certificate under section 61 of the partnership act has also been placed on record. the said two notices and the audit report are not relatable to any action or any place within the jurisdiction ..... 26itr736(sc) , is relatable to the framing of questions of law for the purpose of adjudication of an application under section 66(2) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. the hon'ble supreme court by the aforesaid observation in para. 5 of the judgment in dhirajlal : [1954]26itr736(sc) apparently did not ..... which represent either wholly or partly income or property and not disclosed, or would not be disclosed for the purpose of the indian income-tax act, 1922, or the act of 1961 may invoke the powers of authorisation for the purpose of search and seizure.41. the averments in the writ petitions ..... either wholly or partly income or property which has not been, or would not be, disclosed for the purposes of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or this act (hereinafter in this section referred to as the undisclosed income or property), then, --(a) the director general or director or .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 23 2003 (TRI)

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Shri Debajit Bezbarua

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Reported in : (2004)89ITD387(Gau.)

..... account for and pay to the firm all profits made by him in that business/transaction." 8.4. from reading of section 16 of the indian partnership act we find that this section starts with "subject to contact between the partners". sub-clause (a) of section 16 makes a partner liable to ..... 36 itr 18 (sc). 8.3. since the claim of the assessee is on the basis of clause 11 of the partnership deed, section 16(b) of the indian partnership act and section 88 of the indian trust act, therefore, it is necessary to take note of the same:- "16. personal profits earned by partners - subject to contract ..... an agent of the firm and he has to safeguard the best interest of the firm. clause 11 of the partnership deed, section 16(b) of the indian partnership act and section 88 of indian trust act read together would show that the assessee is statutorily bound to make over his private profit from m/s. altron ..... further addition of rs. 7,766/- without basis is totally unjustified." reliance was also placed that in view of section 16 of indian partnership act read with clause 11 of the partnership deed of m/s. p & d traders dated 31-03-93 and the case laws as submitted in the written submissions referred ..... accounted for and made over the private profit so earned to m/s. p & d traders in terms of specific provision of the partnership deed and section 16 of the indian partnership act, 1932.the profit from proprietary business m/s. altron electronics stood diverted by overriding title to m/s. p & d traders for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 22 2002 (HC)

Santokh Singh Bhabra and anr. Vs. Kalsi Babra Construction Company and ...

Court : Guwahati

..... which will result in further quarrel and squabble amongst them. we have considered this aspect of the matter. it would appear that section 48 of the indian partnership act, 1932 takes care of the aftermath situation. appropriation of the assets after discharge of liabilities has to be pro-rota division of the residue only. ..... upon a passage of pollock & mulla, quoted earlier, that passage is only confined to the inherent powers of the court as to whether dissolution of partnership is just and equitable, but we have demonstrated in the course of our order that it is permissible for the court to refer to arbitration, ..... an appropriate case where, because of existing disputes almost in all counts, the business of the firm could not be carried out in terms of the partnership deed, an award for dissolution thereof cannot be said to be beyond the powers of the arbitrators. in the instant case, the parties were in ..... objection of the appellant.2. the arbitration proceedings was initiated on an application filed under section 8 of the arbitration act, 1940 on behalf of m/s kalsi bhabra construction company, a partnership firm having its principal seat of business at guwahati through its partner, sri kewal singh kalsi. a number of ..... months from the date of entering the reference.3. the arbitration agreement is incorporated in para 18 of the deed of partnership. para 18 reads as follows : '18. that if any dispute shall arise between the parties in respect of the conduct of the business of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 12 2001 (HC)

Pranab Kumar Saha Vs. State of Tripura and ors.

Court : Guwahati

..... liabilities were settled by the partners mutually and again there is no material to show that there was any public notice for retirement as contemplated by section 32 of the indian partnership act. further, according to the respondents, as per annexure-r/1 the petitioner continued to be a member of the firm even on 2.6.1991 as per declaration made by ..... assessed in the individual name of the petitioner as partner of the firm after the date of retirement.9. the provision regarding retirement is contained in section 33 of the indian partnership act, 1932 and the same is reproduced below: -"retirement of a partner.-(l) a partner may retire,-(a) with the consent of all the other partners,(b) in accordance with an ..... the liabilities of the petitioner. again, as per sub-section (3) of section 32 of the indian partnership act, as noted above, the retiring partner shall continue to be liable as partner to the third parties for any act done by the firm which would have been an act of the firm if done before the retirement, until public notice is given of the retirement ..... and liabilities shall be dealt with in accordance with the provision-' of indian partnership act, 1932."8. a perusal of clause-17 extracted above, can never lead to any conclusion that partnership was a partnership at will. (see air 1961 sc 1225, air 1991 sc, 1020 & 2000(1) glj, 469). regarding retirement from partnership mr. lodh submitted that by issuing notice dated 18,2.1991 (annexure .....

Tag this Judgment!


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