Court : Allahabad
Decided on : May-21-1971
Reported in : 83ITR875(All)
..... provided that the partners were to share profits and losses equally, i.e., to the extent of as. 0-5-4 each. it mentioned that the partnership was at will and that the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932, applied to it. these very three persons established another firm by the name of hari shanker gauri shanker rice and dall mills, kanpur, by ..... of the act, on the dissolution of a firm, every partner or his representative is entitled as against all other ..... as to what was the effect of the death of sri prem shanker on the constitution of the two firms, created by the partnership deeds dated 12th june, 1951, and 30th july, 1957. according to section 42 of the indian partnership act, subject to a contract between the parties, a firm is dissolved on the death of a partner. it follows that, unless there ..... shanker, his right to run the business which he was carrying on in partnership with gauri shanker and hari shanker devolved upon his widow or not, will again have to be considered keeping in view theprovisions of the indian partnership act. as stated earlier, section 42(c) of the partnership act provides that a partnership is dissolved by the death of a partner. according to section 46 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Sep-23-1971
Reported in : 86ITR355(All)
..... case, it can be said that the two donees retained the sum of rs. 44,000 to the entire exclusion of the donor.7. according to section 14 of the indian partnership act, all property and rights and interest in property originally brought into the stock of the firm becomes, subject to a contract between the parties, property of the firm. whole concept ..... holding that the donor was entirely excluded from possession and enjoyment of the subject-matter of the gift, viz., a half share of the partnership business and accordingly the provisions of section 10 of the estate duty act were not attracted. learned judges of the assam high court considered the decision of the privy council in clifford john chick's case as ..... . the deed gave a right to each partner to take part in the conduct of the partnership business. on the death of the deceased, more than two years after the date of the gift, a question arose whether section 10 of the estate duty act, 1953, applied on the ground that the deceased was not entirely excluded from possession and enjoyment of ..... property gifted by john chick was so used in connection with the partnership business. after the death of john chick, a question arose whether the value of the property gifted by him was liable to be included in the dutiable estate under section 102(2)(d) of the stamp duties act of new south wales. the privy council held that, although the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-11-1971
Reported in : (1976)78BOMLR642; 46CompCas587(Bom)
..... accept this contention. in my opinion, section 599 merely create a disability. section 69 of the indian partnership act, 1932, creates certain disabilities for partnership firms which are not registered under the provisions of the said act in respect of suits arising from contracts, but does not save such firm from being sued in respect ..... of such contracts. this disability lasts as long as a partnership firm is not registered. similarly, section 599 of the companies act creates certain disabilities in respect of the foreign companies which have not filed returns under section 592 and complied with ..... mistake as to foreign law a mistake of fact for the purpose of avoiding agreements on the ground of mutual mistake. section 38 of the indian evidence act, 1872, provides such law contained in law books published under the authority of that country or report of ruling of the courts of such ..... is a relevant fact. in england proof of foreign law by direct reference to books and reports as provided in section 38 of the indian evidence act is not allowed. according to english rule the ordinary method of proving a point of foreign law is by calling witness skilled in the law ..... that court without making any objection to its jurisdiction, for having taken a chance of a judgment in his favour. so far as suits in indian which are not filed on foreign judgments, in my opinion, the submission of a person to the jurisdiction of a court in india will .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-18-1971
Reported in : (1972)4SCC95; 1971(III)LC259(SC)
..... by special leave from a judgment of the calcutta high court in two connected references made under section 66 of the income tax act, 1922, hereinafter called the 'act'.2. the appellant is a partnership firm duly registered under the indian partnership act, 1982. it consisted of six partners whose names shares are given below :(1) nandlal bhuwalka /3/-(2) girdharilal bhuwalka /3/-(3) shyamlal ..... bhuwalka /2/-(4) bajranglal bhuwalka /2/-(5) rawatmull company /3/-(6) rameshwarlal company /3/-the appellant carried on the business as dealers and commission agents in jute and other commodities. it also acted as procuring agents ..... an appeal before the income tax appellate tribunal which upheld the order of the appellate assistant commissioner.4. the appellant filed a petition under section 66(1) of the act for stating certain questions of law arising out of the order of the appellant tribunal the tribunal referred some questions but did not refer the following question which, on the ..... corresponding year of account being from september 27, 1944 to october 15, 1945. on february 19, 1955 the income tax officer issued a notice under section 34 of the act stating that he had reason to believe that the appellant's income for the year in question had been under-assesssed and the appellant was called upon to file a .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Aug-11-1971
Reported in : 86ITR203(All)
..... be entitled to share the profits and losses of the business in the proportion mentioned in the deed. the document, therefore, clearly evidences the formation of a partnership firm within the meaning of the indian partnership act, it cannot, therefore, be said that the firm was not genuine on the first ground.10. learned counsel for the revenue contended that, although the document dated ..... that the business was being carried on for and on behalf of all the executants but in fact it was not being so carried on. 9. section 4 of the indian partnership act defines partnership as a relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them ..... 2nd of may, 1957, purports to bring into existence a partnership, in reality it was a cloak for some other transaction. in fact, the business of chitra cinema continued ..... , ever took any part in the management of the affairs of the firm. the entire arbitration proceedings, under the cover of which the partnership deed was executed, appeared to be collusive.8. section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922, provided that an application could be made to the income-tax officer on behalf of any firm, constituted under an instrument of .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-15-1971
Reported in : AIR1971SC1015; 79ITR549(SC); (1971)IIMLJ86(SC); (1971)1SCC280; 3SCR365; 1971(III)LC185(SC)
..... kerala high court has in kerala road lines corporation v. commissioner of income-tax, kerala, : 51itr711(ker) clearly expressed the view that reading sections 58 and 59 of the indian partnership act together a firm cannot be said to be registered when the statement prescribed by section 58 and the required fee are sent to the registrar and that the registration of ..... was received by the income-tax officer on october 14, 1955. on october 20, 1955 the assessee filed before the registrar of firms a statement under section 58 of the indian partnership act 1932. on november 2, 1955 the registrar of firms filed the statement of the assessee and made entries in the registrar of firms. on march 23, 1961 the income-tax ..... in that previous year,(ii) before the end of the previous year in another case;(b) where the firm is registered under the indian partnership act, 1932 (ix of 1932) or where the need of partnership is registered under the indian registration act (xvi of 1908) before the end of the previous year of the firm....now it is common ground that the application for registration ..... firms. we are concerned with the following material portion of rule 2.such application shall be ... made....(a) where the firm is not registered under the indian partnership act, 1932 (ix of 1932) on or where the deed of partnership is not registered under the indian registration act, 1908 (xvi of 1908), and the application for registration is being made for the first time under the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Orissa
Decided on : Apr-27-1971
Reported in : AIR1972Ori17
..... the appellant contends that the learned subordinate judge is clearly in error in holding that the suit is hit under section 69 of the indian partnership act. according to him, since that is the only count on which the suit had been dismissed, if it is held that the bar under ..... of registration and for defect of parties?as alreadv indicated, he found that maliram gourishankar was a partnership firm and in view of the admitted position that there is no registration under the indian partnership act. the suit was bad.there is no documentary evidence to show that the plaintiff maliram and one ..... gourishankar constituted a partnership firm under the name and style of 'maliram-gourishankar'. nor is there any agreement of partnership produced. the plaintiff as p. w. ..... in the circumstances, both the aspects require examination. i shall first proceed to examine whether the suit is hit under section 69 of the partnership act.the plaintiff alleged in paragraph 1 of the plaint that he is the proprietor of the firm maliram-gourishankar having its head-office at calcutta ..... was a firm consisting of maliram. (p. w. 2) and gourishankar (p. w. 1). since the firm was not registered under the partnership act the suit was hit under section 69 thereof. he next contended that while the transactions did take place on the dates indicated and to the extents .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-10-1971
Reported in : 91ITR333(AP)
..... is that the shares of the major partners in loss in the firm have not been specified in the instrument of partnership. we cannot for this purpose take recourse to section 13(b) of the indian partnership act. section 13(b) of the indian partnership act says that, subject to an agreement to the contrary, the shares of the partners, if not specified, will be taken as ..... shares of the partners, a deed of partnership between a firm and an individual which specified the collective shares of the ..... specification of shares in the instruments of partnership meant clear setting out of fraction or proportion of the share in the instrument does not now hold the field. the supreme court has given an enlarged and a liberal meaning to the word ' specified'. the word 'specifying ' was used in section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922 and in rule 2 of ..... firm b the deed of partnership of firm b was signed by all the major partners of firm a. the question was whether firm b was entitled to be registered under section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922. their lordships of the supreme court held that the right to registration under section 26a being conditional upon the specification of the individual .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : May-20-1971
Reported in : 84ITR233(All)
..... intended by the expression ' a change in the constitution of the firm ' used in different places in those sections. for that we must turn to the law contained in the indian partnership act.15. we may now examine the cases to which reference has been madebefore us. reliance has been placed on behalf of the petitioner-firm onthe b. c. g. a. (punjab ..... persons called a firm. he cannot be a partner of the firm. but while he is incapable of being a partner under section 30 of the indian partnership act he may be admitted to the benefits of partnership. section 30(1) declares :' a person who is a minor according to the law to which he is subject may not be a partner in a ..... the firm there is no change in the constitution of the firm.6. we think it 'is first necessary to determine what is intended by the constitution of a partnership firm.. section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, defines a partnership as :'... the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them ..... , who by reason of infancy was incompetant to contract, could not make a contract within the meaning of that act. by section 11 of the act, a minor's agreement is altogether void and unenforceable. the definition of 'partnership' in section 4 of the indian partnership act necessarily envisages an agreement between the partners. a minor, being incapable of entering into an agreement, cannot enter into .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-30-1971
Reported in : AIR1971Kant318; AIR1971Mys318; (1971)2MysLJ68
..... name and style of 'doddengudda estates', and to register the said firm, under that name, with the registrar of firms in mysore, bangalore-1, under the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932 (act 9 of 1932); and, whereas, it would have been right and proper and in the fitness of things to have the sale deed executed in the name of the said ..... lieu of and in juxtaposition to the names mentioned as co-owners in the aforesaid sale-deed, and that they are bound by and governed by the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932, both as to their proprietary rights therein, as also as to their share in the profits and losses of the said registered firm, 'doddengudda estates', as more particularly specified ..... which all the partners would have interest in proportion to their share in the joint venture of the business of the partnership. since the firm has no legal existence, the partnership property will vest in all the partners. the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932 do not prescribe any particular mode by which properties whether moveable or immoveable have to be brought into common ..... a question that the document was liable to be charged as a 'conveyance' under article 23 of schedule i of the indian stamp act, (madras amendment act no. 19) 1958. or that even if it is construed as a document of partnership under article 46 of the said schedule, it was liable to bo considered as a composite document and liable to be charged .....Tag this Judgment!