Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Year: 1960 Page 5 of about 129 results (0.182 seconds)

Sep 26 1960 (HC)

K.P. Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Sep-26-1960

Reported in : AIR1962Raj152

..... 1954-55, the previous year being the period ranging from, 10-10-1952 to 26-10-1953 (both inclusive). the assessee is a partnership firm registered under section 26a of the indian income-tax act consisting of 4 partners, one of them being shri kishan chand son of maya ram, opposite party no. 2. he had an ..... a further sum of rs. 40,000/-/- to that of his mother jasodhabai as cash gifts. mayaram, chella ram, and shrimati jasodhabai had accounts with the partnership firm and the sum of rs. 60,000/-/- and rs. 40,000/-/-were credited to their respective accounts accordingly and a sum of one lakh was debited ..... was not entitled to claim a deduction of the interest credited in the books to the trust account from his income under section 10 of the indian income-tax act.6. in the cases discussed above the donees made entries in their own books of account in pursuance of their intentions to make gifts of their ..... rs. 1,108/-/- credited to the accounts' of donees by the assesses firm could not be regarded as allowable deductions under section 10 (2) (iii) of the indian income-tax act. the tribunal relied on the following decisions in coming to this conclusion :(1) chamber v. chamber air 1941 mad 154; (2) r. m. v. muthappa chettiar ..... ranawat, j.1. this is a reference by the income-tax appellate tribunal (delhi branch) under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act. the following questions have been referred :1. whether on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the debit entry of rs. 1 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 09 1960 (HC)

Sheik Abdul Sattar Vs. District Collector, Masulipatam, and Another.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-09-1960

Reported in : [1960]40ITR27(AP)

..... petitioner contended before the income-tax officer that after the death of sattar saheb, by a deed of partnership dated november 21, 1949, a partnership firm was constituted and that the firm ought to have been registered under section 26a of the indian income-tax act. the income-tax officer rejected the claim for registration and made an assessment against the petitioner and other ..... the income-tax authorities did not know that the late abdul sattar saheb had left other legal representatives, by reasons of the filing of the partnership deed for the purposes of registration under section 26a of the act for the year 1950-51. whether the income-tax authorities knew that there were other legal representatives besides the petitioner or not, seems to ..... v. first additional income-tax officer, karaikudi ([1958] 33 i.t.r. 466.) where the learned judges held that the legal fiction created under section 24b(2) of the indian income-tax act of treating a legal representative as the assessee is only for the limited purpose of the assessment and does not extend to the recovery or collection of tax, and ..... -44, 1944-45 respectively and the assessment was actually made on 30th march, 1946.both these cases are with respect to the assessments that were made prior to the indian income-tax (amendment) act, 1953. and, therefore, there is no substance in the contention of the learned counsel that the amended definition cannot be used for the purpose of determining whether a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 19 1960 (HC)

Indian Woollen Textile Mills Vs. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax, P ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-19-1960

Reported in : AIR1960P& H582; [1960]39ITR289(P& H)

..... income-tax authorities, they took the view that such a partnership consisting of a karta and a junior member of the family was invalid and assessment was ..... by time.again, the appellate tribunal did not agree and held that because of the amendment of s. 15 of the excess profits tax act by act 22 of 1947 the limitation of five years had ceased to operate even in respect of the two years in dispute, that is, 1939-40 ..... its intention more clearly, the intention being that this particular amendment was to have retrospective effect as from the date of the excess profits tax act itself. mr. mittra referred to certain decided cases, but admittedly none of those was concerned with the interpretation of such language as has been ..... were therefore valid. the assessee's appeals were accordingly disposed of. the assessee thereupon made four applications under s. 21 of the excess profits tax act for referring certain questions of law arising in connection with these four assessments to the high court, that is, the assessments relating to the chargeable ..... textile mills, chheharta, claimed to be a partnership firm, consisting of lachhman das, karta of hindu undivided family, and his son daulat ram, a member of the same family, in his individual capacity. when the question of assessment under the indian income-tax act of the year 1938-39 came up before the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 04 1960 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Hyderabad Vs. J. Govinda Rao and Sons.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-04-1960

Reported in : [1961]41ITR186(AP)

..... rule is in these words :'any firm constituted under an instrument of partnership specifying the individual shares of the partners may, under the provisions of section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (hereinafter in these rules referred to as the act), register with the income-tax officer, the particulars contained in the ..... district, were originally assessed for the assessment year 1945-46 on a turnover of rs. 24,668 under section 23 (3) of the indian income-tax act. in the course of investigation in regard to the assessment for the years 1946-47 and 1947-48, it came to the knowledge of ..... to the firm for the year 1946-47 and the appellate assistant commissioner to receive the application filed under rule 2 (c) of the indian income-tax rules for the year 1947-48 and dispose of it according to law.'in compliance with the direction of this court, the tribunal ..... (not being minors) personally and shall be made -(c) with the permission of the appellate assistant commissioner hearing an appeal under section 36 of the act, before the assessment is confirmed, reduced, enhanced or annulled.'it is immediately clear from this rule that clause (c) envisages only the condonation of ..... matter, namely, whether the income-tax officer has exercised his jurisdiction judiciously or not. on the other hand, the tribunal thought that the officer acted illegally in either canceling the registration for the previous year or refusing to renew it for the subsequent year, when the genuineness of the firm .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 1960 (SC)

The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay Vs. Chandulal Keshavlal and Co. ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-17-1960

Reported in : AIR1960SC738; (1960)62BOMLR567; [1960]30CompCas261(SC); [1960]38ITR601(SC); (1960)IIMLJ101(SC); [1960]3SCR38

..... arises out of a reference by the income-tax appellate tribunal under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act (hereinafter termed the act). the appellant in this appeal is the commissioner of income-tax and the respondent is a partnership firm which, by an agreement dated september 23, 1935, was appointed the managing agent of the ..... the absence of a suggestion of a fraud this is not relevant at all for giving effect to the provisions of section 12(2) of the income-tax act. most commercial transactions are entered into for the mutual benefit of both sides, or at any rate each side hopes to gain something for itself. the test ..... 5%. the income-tax appellate tribunal and the high court held that the interest on debentures was not an allowable expenditure under s. 12(2) of the act. this court, on appeal, was of the opinion that the transaction was of a commercial nature from the point of view of the assessee company and ..... the bonus which the managed company paid to some of its officers and claimed it as a deductible expenditure under s. 10(2)(xv) of the act. this deduction was allowed on the ground that the object of the payment from the point of view of commercial principles was to increase the profits of ..... or a part thereof is foregone in the interest of the managed company, it would be allowed as an expenditure under section 10(2)(xv) of the act. we allow the amount foregone under section 10(2)(xv).' 2. against this order, at the instance of the appellant, a case was stated to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 15 1960 (SC)

Charandas Haridas and anr. Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-15-1960

Reported in : AIR1960SC910; (1960)62BOMLR663; [1960]39ITR202(SC); [1960]3SCR296

..... could be made was to divide the income, and this had the necessary effect, in law, of dividing the assets, if not for the purposes of the partnership act, at least for the purposes of assessing income-tax. he, therefore, contended that the hindu undivided family which had ceased to exist in so far as ..... point of fact, and the income which accrues, cannot be said to be of a hindu undivided family. there is nothing in the indian income-tax law or the law of partnership which prevents the members of a hindu joint family from dividing any asset. such division must, of course, be effective so as to ..... do not ipso facto become partners in the business so as to clothe them with all the rights and obligations of a partner as defined by the indian contract act. in such a case the family as a unit does not become a partner, but only such of its members as in fact enter into ..... against the judgment and order dated february 16, 1955, of the high court of bombay in an income-tax reference under s. 66(2) of the indian income-tax act. 2. the appellants are two assessees, charandas haridas and chinubhai haridas, whose cases are identical, and, in fact, there was a consolidated reference by the ..... hindu undivided family. the tribunal having declined to state a case under s. 66(1) of the indian income-tax act, charandas haridas moved the bombay high court, and obtained an order under s. 66(2) of the act. the question on which the case was stated was : 'whether there were materials to justify the finding .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 12 1960 (HC)

Shaikh Safir Mahammad and anr. Vs. Basir Mahammad

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Aug-12-1960

Reported in : AIR1961Ori92

..... . if only the plaintiff has been able to make out a case of partnership or agency or fiduciary relationship then only he can take advantage of the provision of indian trusts act and the provisions arising out of the relationship of partners or principal and agent. in that event only he can be allowed ..... no. 1 can be taken to be on his behalf also provided he is able to show sufficient materials on record to make out and establish a case of either partnership by express term or by implication on account of the conduct of the parties, or that there was relationship of principal and agent or any fiduciary relationship between the parties .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 11 1960 (HC)

Ved Parkash and ors. Vs. Iron Traders (Private) Ltd. and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-11-1960

Reported in : AIR1960P& H427; [1961]31CompCas122(P& H)

..... order1. this is a petition filed by ved prakash, maya prakash and satya prakash sons of hira lal and the partnership firm messrs. hira lal and sons under ss. 397 and 398 of the indian companies act against the company messrs. iron traders (private) limited and three persons, respondents nos. 2 to 4, described as de ..... establish their rights as advised by him, are now seeking the same relief under the guise of an application under ss. 397 and 398 of the act. the learned counsel for the petitioners was unable to cite any case in which such a course had been permitted, and in my opinion he will ..... in proper proceedings i.e. in a regular suit after the learned district judge has dismissed the petitioners' application for rectification under s. 153 of the act. (6) it was pointed out that the removal of the petitioners was mentioned in the petition, and one of the reliefs which they sought in the ..... the company. (5) on behalf of the petitioners it was argued, and the learned counsel was prepared to cite cases on the point, that the act of the directors in rectifying the register on 16-1-1957 and striking out the names of the petitioners as members was illegal. this view may be ..... facto directors of the company though it is alleged that they had no proper authority to act as such, and two other respondents, hira lal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 26 1960 (HC)

Sahdeo Vijay Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-26-1960

Reported in : [1961]42ITR182(Raj)

..... it may be mentioned that sahdeo vijay kumar, kesrisinghpur, is a partnership firm constituted under an instrument of partnership dated the 5th of january, 1953. the firm started functioning on the 2nd of march, 1951. it was registered under section 26a of the indian income-tax act for the assessment year 1953-54 and 1954-55. the assessee firm ..... give 14 days notice of his intention to refuse the claim for renewal of registration in accordance with the proviso to section 23(4) of the indian income-tax act ?'the facts and circumstances of this case have been described in detail in the statement of this case have been described in detail in the statement ..... relied upon the decision in agarwal and co. v. income-tax officer.an application for registration of a partnership firm has to be made under the provisions of section 26a of the income-tax act and is under the act. under rule 6a an income-tax officer has been authorised to refuse to register or to refuse to ..... renew registration in case he is not satisfied that such a partnership firm did or does exist. such officer has also been ..... ranawat, j. - this is a reference under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act by the income-tax appellate tribunal, delhi bench. the following question has been referred :'whether on the facts and in the circumstances of this .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 24 1960 (HC)

Sait Nagjee Purushotham and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras

Court : Kerala

Decided on : May-24-1960

Reported in : AIR1960Ker364

..... . the learned advocate-general, who has appeared for the assessee, has argued that the business carried on by the partnership of 1918, had been assessed to the tax under the indian income-tax act, 1918, that the same business had been continued till the private company was formed in february, 1948, and that ..... , in such a case, there is no devolution of the business as a whole. in that case, there was a partnership, which had paid tax under the act of 1918, the partnership at one time consisting of three partners.thereafter, there were several changes in 1924 one of the original partners went out, ..... -50, the assessee has claimed relief under section 25(4) of the indian income-tax act, hereinafter referred to as the act; and the facts, on which the claim was made, may be briefly stated.2. on 6-12-1918, a partnership deed was executed between six persons, five being related, and the sixth ..... vocation, on which tax was at any time charged under the provisions of the indian income-tax act, 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 ..... amalgamated in 1943, and that really amounted to succession by the newly constituted firm.the tribunal, therefore, held that the partnership of 1943 wag not an entity taxed under the income-tax act, 1918, and the benefit of section 25(4) cannot be given to the assessee. the asscssee claimed that a question .....

Tag this Judgment!


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