Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Year: 1970 Page 7 of about 131 results (0.095 seconds)

May 20 1970 (HC)

Raibahadur Chowdhury Vs. Income-tax Officer, b Ward and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : May-20-1970

Reported in : [1971]79ITR274(Cal)

..... 24th march, 1965, issued by the respondent no. 1 under section 148 of the income-tax act, 1961, for the assessment year 1948-49. the original assessment order under section 23(3) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, was passed on the 16th january, 1952. the petitioner's case was that, ..... , the appellate tribunal set aside the entire reassessment order and restored the original assessment order. no steps were taken under section 35 of the 1922 act to rectify the mistake; nor was any reference to the high court sought against the order of the appellate tribunal. thereafter, the income-tax officer ..... appellate assistant commissioner was clearly of the view that there was no justification for issue of notice under section 34(1)(a) of the 1922 act, inasmuch as the income-tax officer responsible for the original assessment made enquiries and was satisfied that the loans were genuine. the department appealed against ..... stood dismissed as withdrawn. but, on the 24th march, 1965, another notice was issued to the petitioner under section 148 of the income-tax act, 1961. it appears from paragraph 8 of the affidavit-in-opposition of monoranjan ghosh affirmed on the 27th july, 1965, that before the notice ..... under section 34(1)(a) of the act of 1922. the petitioner was called upon to prove the genuineness of these loans. affidavits affirmed by the said five persons were filed before the income-tax officer stating that they had made advances to the partnership firm, namely, the petitioner, but the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 26 1970 (SC)

Luka Mathai Vs. Neelakanta Iyer Subramonia Iyer

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-26-1970

Reported in : (1971)3SCC974; [1971]1SCR629

s.m. sikri, j.1. this appeal by certificate granted by the high court of kerala is directed against its judgment and decree reversing the judgment and decree of the trial court and dismissing the suit of the original plaintiff, appellant before us. the relevant facts for determining the points raised before us by mr. chagla. learned counsel for the appellant, are as follows.2. on december 5, 1931, the plaintiff executed a hypothecation bond in favour of the travancore government in respect of a loan of rs. 6,000/-. on december 12.1931. another bond was executed in respect of a further loan of rs. 4.400/-. on may 28, 1932, the plaintiff executed another hypothecation bond in favour of the father of neelakama iyer subramonia iyer respondent before us. in the government gazettes dated february 21. 1939, and april 25, 1939, under paragraph 6 reference is made to the arrears of rs. 4,193 chs. 19 ca. 9 plus interest under the special loan to be paid by luka mathai of pallithanathu, kottayam taluk, and the sale of 97 acres of nilam comprised in survey 545/32-11/1 and 14 cents of purayidam comprised in survey 532/3.3. a notice was issued to the plaintiff in march or april 1939 (27-8-1114 m.e.) that as he had to repay rs. 4,193 chs. 19 ca. 9 under the special loan plus the execution costs and the interest thereon 'it-is hereby made known that 107 acres 84 cents of properties belonging to you and comprised in survey numbers 545/ 32-11/1, 481/3, 481/4a, 481-/4c etc. of pulinkunnu .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 27 1970 (SC)

M.C. Sulkunte Vs. State of Mysore

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-27-1970

Reported in : AIR1971SC508; 1971CriLJ519; (1970)3SCC513; 1971(III)LC83(SC)

..... to show that the appellant in counter-signing the certificate issued by the medical officer of bidar, p.w. 27, was only doing a professional act by way of private practice and that he was entitled to payment of fees therefore. such a case requires investigation into facts, which were not brought ..... of the proceedings inter alia on the ground that the investigation had not been carried on by a designated officer under section 5-a of the act. the special judge went into the question in some detail and held that on the facts of the case there was administrative exigency to permit the ..... present at the headquarters! further the inspector did not tell him why he and not the high ranking officer mentioned in section 6-a of the act was going to investigate the case. in his cross-examination he stated that he felt that the matter was urgent and the offence was likely to ..... permission to an inspector of police, p. ramarao, to investigate the offence of criminal misconduct of obtaining illegal gratification.3. section 5-a of the act contains certain safeguards from undue harassment of public officers from enquiry by ensuring that the investigation in regard to the offences specified is conducted by a police ..... subsequently the state also filed criminal petition no. 126 of 1965 for enhancement of the sentence on the ground that under section 5(2) of the act the minimum punishment was to be not less than one year unless the court for special reasons thought fit to do otherwise. the reasons given by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 1970 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City I Vs. Champaklal Dalsukhbhai

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-18-1970

Reported in : [1971]81ITR293(Bom)

..... as representing his hindu undivided family. it is a matter of intention. there is, however, no express declaration as to intention in the deed of partnership of the fourth firm, nor in any other contemporaneous document when the fourth firm was started. the intention has, therefore, to be ascertained from subsequent ..... was a partner in the firm of messrs. chhaganlal kasturchand in his capacity as the karta and as representing his hindu undivided family. in that partnership capital had to be contributed and both these assessees contributed their shares of the capital from the monies belonging to their respective hindu undivided families. ..... mulchand, he being the assessee in that reference. 13. now, as stated earlier, the fourth firm was started in s. y. 2005. the partnership deed does not provide that any of the partners constituting that firm had to contribute anything by way of capital of the firm and in fact no ..... separate and was not thrown into the common hotchpot, nor even enjoyed by the hindu undivided family and further that there was nothing in the partnership deed of the fourth firm to show that champaklal was a partner in the firm in his capacity as a karta of the hindu undivided family ..... by a common judgment and the parties also have not objected to that procedure being adopted. both the reference are under section 66(2) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. 2. the question of law referred in the first reference is : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 02 1970 (HC)

M.P. Lokiah and ors. Vs. V.M. Jayaram Naidu

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-02-1970

Reported in : (1971)2MLJ155

..... present appeal arises for stay of all further proceedings in the suit and for referring the matter to arbitration in pursuance of a clause in the partnership agreement which provides for arbitration in case of dispute among the partners. 3. the main contention of the respondent-plaintiff is that, as the ..... the suit in question for dissolution of the partnership and for accounts and has contended in the suit inter alia that the first appellant was manipulating the account books of the firm and was ..... of all further proceedings in the said suit and for reference of the matter to arbitration. 2. the appellants and the respondent-plaintiff constituted a partnership firm under the name and style of m/s. nethaji brick works and the first appellant was the managing partner thereof. the respondent has instituted ..... a party is willing that the suit should proceed, in my opinion would be a step in the proceedings within section 19 of the indian arbitration act and the intention of the party is to be gathered from the matter of application which is made and if, having regard to the ..... filed by the appellants for return of the documents would constitute a step in the proceedings contemplated by section 34 of the indian arbitration act. 5. section 34 of the arbitration act provides that the application for stay must be filed by the defendants 'at any time before filing a written document or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 11 1970 (SC)

Malegaon Electricity Co. P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bomba ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-11-1970

Reported in : AIR1970SC1982; [1970]78ITR466(SC); (1970)2SCC431; [1971]1SCR761

..... question that arose for decision was whether the assessee's failure to include in his return the income of his wife and his minor sons admitted to the partnership of which he was a partner assessable in his hands under section 16(3)(a) (ii) can be considered as a failure to disclose truly and ..... scope of section 34(1)(a). therein this court observed that in the form of return prescribed under rule 19, of the indian income-tax rules, 1922, framed under section 59 of the act, there was no clause which required disclosure of the income of any person other than the income of the assessee, which was ..... included in his total income. nor was the assessee required under section 22(5) of the act, in making a return, to disclose that any income was received by his wife or minor child admitted to the benefits of partnership in a firm of which he was a partner. hence by not snowing the income of ..... the opinion, that the high court should not have and we in our turn will not answer the questions referred under section 66(1) of the act because in our opinion those questions cannot be answered without first deciding whether the part of the sale price received by the assessee amounts to profits under ..... his wife and minor children, the assessee cannot be deemed to have failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment within the meaning of section 34(1)(a) of the act. therein .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 24 1970 (HC)

Narisingh Dass Sharma Vs. Delhi Administration, Union Territory of Del ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Dec-24-1970

Reported in : AIR1971Delhi198

..... the dues may be recovered 'from all these connected with business of nanak singh and company'. enquires thereafter revealed the existence of the sub-partnership referred to above in which the petitioners as stated earlier were partners with nanak singh. respondent no. 3 also received a copy of a ..... them were, thereforee, taken by respondent 1 and 2. a certificate in the prescribed form was issued by the collector under the revenue recovery act (act 1 of 1890) and was sent to respondent no. 3, the district collector and recovery officer for initiating the necessary proceedings. respondent no. ..... them to nanak singh.5. after hearing the learned counsel for the parties i think there is merit in this objection. the punjab excise act, 1914 (act 1 of 1914) as applied to delhi, it was not disputed before me, contains the law regulating, amongst others, manufacture, sale and intoxicating ..... institute a suit in a civil court. shri kirpal urged that the petitioners had the alternative remedy provided by this provision and relief under act. 226 of the constitution should not be allowed to them. the argument cannot be accepted firstly because according to section 78 the person ..... ,290/- from the petitioners in the two petitions. in these circumstances both the petitioners have come up to this court with petitions under act 226 of the constitution praying that the recovery proceedings initiating that the recovery proceedings initiated against them being wholly illegal and not sustainable in law .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 16 1970 (HC)

Ranjit Singh and anr. Vs. the Assessing Authority and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Oct-16-1970

Reported in : 8(1972)DLT116; [1972]29STC499(Delhi)

..... lacuna in the statute or the rules framed there under the benefit of the same must. go to the citizen. it is settled law that a partnership film ceases to be liable to assessment by the mere fact of its dissolution where the proceedings for assessment are initiated after the dissolution. (see in ..... 1959. they contend that the sales-tax sought to be recovered from them is not payable inasmuch as the assessments have been made against a dissolved partnership firm which is not permitted by law and the sales tax, if any, payable on the turnover of the relevant period was the responsibility of one ..... competent authority is satisfied about the dissolution the former partners of the dissolved frm will continue to be liable for payment of sales- tax, under the act. the result is that this petition must succeed and i hereby issue a writ quashing the demands made against the petitioners and restraining the respondents from ..... union territory of delhi. the firm was dissolved by a deed of dissolution dated 10. 3. 1957 where under all the business assets and liabilities of the erstwhile partnership firm were taken over by manohar lal and the two ..... 10. 3. 1957. the partnership firm used to carry on work under the name and style of m/s. juginder pal rarjit singh and comprised of three partners this firm was a registered dealer within the meaning of section 2(c)of the bengal finance (sales-tax) act, 1941 as extended to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 09 1970 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Textile Machinery Corporation

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jul-09-1970

Reported in : [1971]80ITR428(Cal)

..... provision it follows that this licencedoes not cover the jute mill division of the assessee which is also claimingfor exemption under section 15c of the indian income-tax act, 1922. thisindustrial licence, therefore, is only confined to the steel foundry divisionof the assessee. 47. the statutory complex operating on this point ..... however, concerned with, is not reconstruction of a 'company' but recon-struction of a 'business' under section 15c(2)(i) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. reconstruction of a company with its limited concept is not the same thing as reconstruction of a business. if mr. justice buckley was ..... substance and in form one of out and out sale and the only relation that remained between the partnership and the assessee-company was that the members of the partnership became shareholders in part in the assessee-company and this was held to be not a reconstruction of an ..... industry carried on in one or, more factories by any person or authority including government.'19. the words 'industrial undertaking' in the indian income-tax act, 1922, should, in our view, be interpreted to mean any venture or enterprise which a person undertakes to do and which has ..... existing business and on that ground a division bench of the bombay high court came to the conclusion that th& assessee-company there was entitled to relief under section 15c of the income-tax act .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 21 1970 (SC)

L. Hirday NaraIn Vs. Income-tax Officer, Bareilly

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-21-1970

Reported in : AIR1971SC33; [1970]78ITR26(SC); (1970)2SCC355; [1971]1SCR683

..... as not maintainable the petition which was entertained and was heard on the merits.13. the high court observed that under section 35 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, the jurisdiction of the income-tax officer is discretionary. if thereby it is intended that the income-tax officer has discretion to exercise ..... september 30, 1950 the income was assessed in the hands of hirday narain in the status of a hindu undivided family. section 16 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, by sub-section (3)(a)(ii) provides :in computing the total income of any individual for the purpose of assessment there shall be ..... hindu undivided family and liable to tax in the hands of hirday narain by the application of section 16(3) (a) (ii) of the indian income-tax act, 1922.4. hirday narain then applied for rectification of a mistake in the order of assessment which he claimed was apparent from the record. he ..... individual, and to that income, the income of his minor children arising out of the partnership to which they were admitted was liable to be added under section 16(3)(a)(ii) of the income-tax act, and the tax officer was entitled and indeed bound to rectify the assessment when his ..... included--(a) so much of the income of a wife or minor child of such individual as arises directly or indirectly--* * * *(ii) from the admission of the minor to the benefits of partnership .....

Tag this Judgment!


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