Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Year: 1970 Page 8 of about 131 results (0.090 seconds)

Jan 08 1970 (HC)

Shiv Dayal Vs. Sohan Lal Bassar

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-08-1970

Reported in : AIR1970P& H468; 1970CriLJ1517

..... brothers shiv dayal and kishan chand were joint owners of two firms known as. amin chand and sons and landra engineering and foundry works. these were partnership firms and were engaged in the manufacture and sale of chaff cutters, their parts, etc. the firms were using registered trade marks on the manufactured ..... received creditable information with a view to destroy the evidence of infringement and contravention of the provisions of the trade and merchandise marks act and as well as the indian penal code the accused are about to remove the said goods and articles and if the accused are successful in doing so, the ..... not proper and had been exercised without bearing in mind that a warrant for search is not a mere formality and in fact is a drastic act and the power should be sparingly exercised. these, therefore, appear to be fit cases for accepting the references made by the additional sessions judge and ..... it was mentioned that the complainant apprehended that with a view to destroy the evidence of the infringement and contravention of the trade and merchandise marks act the accused were likely to remove the goods and articles from the office, factory and godown of the firms and if that was allowed to ..... first class, phillaur on 21st may, 1968, under sections 78 and 79 of the trade and merchandise marks act. 1958, and sections 416, 420, 478, 482, 483. 485 and 486 of the indian penal code on the allegations that the accused in those cases were using the infringed trade marks which they .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 14 1970 (HC)

Chhaganmal Agarwalla Vs. Income-tax Officer, a Ward and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : May-14-1970

Reported in : [1972]86ITR248(Cal)

..... , dist. iv(3), made an order of assessment under section 23(3) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the old act'), for the assessment year 1961-62 against the petitioner. on march 31, 1966, an order of assessment was passed against the petitioner's partnership firm, jaswantrai & bros., for the assessment year 1961-62. the respondent no. 1, namely ..... act and not under the indian income-tax act, this argument, however, loses point, because the exercise of a power will ..... . this contention was negatived by the supreme court. hidayatullah j., as he then was, observed :'the patiala income-tax act contained provisions almost similar to sections 5(5) and 5(7a) of the indian income-tax act. sub-section (5) differed in this that the commissioner of income-tax was required to consult the minister-in-charge before taking action under that sub ..... bidi supply company v. union of india, : [1956]29itr717(sc) . did not find place in the patiala act. the commissioner, when he transferred this case, referred not to the patiala income-tax act but to the indian income-tax act, and it is contended that if the patiala income-tax act was in force for purposes of reassessment, action should have been taken under that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 15 1970 (HC)

Jwala Prasad Radha Kishan Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jul-15-1970

Reported in : [1971]79ITR530(All)

..... behalf of the revenue. it was, in fact, not an expenditure at all, much less a capital expenditure. ' expenditure ', as defined by the supreme court in indian molasses co. (p.) ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax : [1959]37itr66(sc) . means money which goes out irretrievably. but here, the assessee was entitled ..... the english income tax act, 1952, specifically provides for allowance of a loss sustained in any trade carried on by a person solely or in partnership. the distinction between loss and expenditure has been indicated by finlay j. in alien v. farquharson ..... return in the shape of profits and the loss suffered by the assessee was a capital loss not allowable under any of the provisions of the act. the bombay high court affirmed the view taken by the tribunal. the supreme court, however, reversed the decision of the high court and ..... the supreme court in badridas daga v. commissioner of income-tax, : [1958]34itr10(sc) . supports this view. under section 10(1) of the act tax is payable on profits and game of a business computed on ordinary commercial principles and deductions must be allowed in respect of losses so connected with ..... society v. styles, [1892] 3 t.c. 185, 188, 189 (h.l.). in the indian income-tax act, 1972, while there is provision for allowability or otherwise of business expenditure in section 10 of the act, there is no express reference to business loss therein. on the other hand, section 341(1) of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 21 1970 (HC)

S.B. Gowramma Vs. Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Mercara and anr.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Mar-21-1970

Reported in : [1971]79ITR194(KAR); [1971]79ITR194(Karn)

..... said order, the petitioner has approached this court for relief under article 226 of the constitution of india. section 11(2) of the act is in pari materia with section 16(3) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. the supreme court commissioner of income-tax v. sodra devi has held that : 'the words 'any individual' and 'such ..... petitioner submitted a return of income under the act for the assessment year 1967-68, in the status of an 'individual'. in the said return she included not only her share of the income from the ..... , is one of the partners of the firm by name 'punniah group of estates, sunticoppa', and is an assessee under the mysore agricultural income-tax act, 1957, hereinafter called 'the act.' during the assessment year 1967-68 there were five partners in the said firm, and one of them was a minor son of the petitioner. the ..... on the said total income. on january 22, 1969, the petitioner made an application to the respondent under section 37 (2) (b) of the act for rectification of the assessment order by restricting the assessment made on the petitioner to her income only, since under section 11(2) of the ..... (3) of the act are restricted in their connotation to mean only the male of the species, and do not include the female of the species. in computing the total income of a mother the income of her minor child arising from the admission of the minor to the benefits of partnership in a firm of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 10 1970 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jishan Lal Kuthiala

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-10-1970

Reported in : [1972]86ITR680(P& H)

..... by the hindu undivided family for the assessment year 1956-57 the assessee declared a loss of rs. 9,447 regarding the family's share in this partnership business. as the assessment of the firm was still pending at that time, the income-tax officer ignored the loss shown by the assessee from this ..... the income-tax officer declined to do so. he took the view that the claim of the assessee was not permissible under section 24 of the indian income-tax act 1922.4. the assessee then preferred an appeal to the appellate assistant commissioner and claimed the set-off with regard to the aforesaid loss. the appellate ..... .r. 710 (s.c.). the commissioner of income-tax being dissatisfied with the decision of the appellate tribunal applied under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, requiring it to refer the question of law, already stated, for the opinion of this court. that is how the matter has been placed before us ..... against its other business income under section 10 of the said act ?'2. the assessee is a hindu undivided family. it derives income from shares held in certain firms, dividend income, etc. the assessee family had 9 ..... , on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in law in holding that section 24(1) of the income-tax act, 1922, did not apply to the assessee's case and that the assessee-family was entitled to set off its share of loss in the unregistered firm .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 12 1970 (HC)

Agarwal Brothers Vs. Income-tax Officer, F-ward

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-12-1970

Reported in : [1971]79ITR101(All)

..... the constitution.3. sri s. b. l. srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that the assessment proceeding lay under the indian income-tax act, 1922, and not under the provisions of the income-tax act, 1961. he urges that inasmuch as the income said to have been concealed by the petitioner was less than rs. 1,00, ..... ward, varanasi, [1969] 72 i.t.r. 349 (all.). the question then is whether the period of limitation for taking reassessment proceedings had already expired before the act of 1961 came into force. that will depend on whether the amount of concealed income, according to the reasons recorded by the income-tax officer, exceeded rs. 1,00 ..... the assessment year. that period expired, it is pointed out, on march 31, 1962, and, thereafter, recourse could not be had to the provisions of the act of 1961 for taking reassessment proceedings.4. learned counsel for the respondents contends that according to the reasons recorded by the income-tax officer the concealed income exceeded rs. ..... , 1953. it is alleged that the petitioner-firm was dissolved in 1959. subsequently, a notice dated june 26, 1965, under section 148 of the income-tax act, 1961, was served on murari lal, a former partner of the firm. the income-tax officer made an assessment order dated march 10, 1969, under section 147 ..... pathak, j.1. the petitioner is a partnership firm consisting of four partners. it carries on business in gold and silver ornaments.2. for the assessment year 1953-54, the income-tax. officer .....

Tag this Judgment!

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!


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