Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Year: 1975 Page 2 of about 137 results (0.059 seconds)

Oct 06 1975 (SC)

Mandyala Govindu and Co. Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pr ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-06-1975

Reported in : AIR1975SC2284; [1976]102ITR1(SC); (1976)1SCC248; [1976]2SCR131; 1975(7)LC859(SC)

..... in the profits, there can be no presumption that the losses are to be equally shared between them.9. section 13(b) of the indian partnership act, 1932 reproduce the provisions of the repealed section 253(2) of the indian contract act, 1872.in k. pitchiah chettiar v. g. subramaniam chettiar ilr 58 mad.25 ramesam j. explained the scope of section 253(2) of ..... shares of the partners in the losses is obviously untenable. this clause says that the partners are 'bound to act according to the provisions of the indian partnership act'; that they are in any case, and it is not clear which provision of the partnership act indicated the proportion in which the partners were to bear the losses in this case. counsel for the appellant refers ..... of agreement, the instrument closes with clause 9 which states :we (the partners) are bound to act according to the above mentioned stipulations and also according to the provisions of the indian partnership act....3. the high court was of the view that unless the instrument of partnership specified the shares of the partners not only in the profits but also in the losses, the ..... to section 13(b) of the partnership act in this connection. section 13(b) reads :subject to contract between the partners(a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 27 1975 (HC)

C.V. George and ors. Vs. Income-tax Officer and anr.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jan-27-1975

Reported in : [1976]102ITR724(Ker)

..... a firm, it becomes a liability or debt of the firm. under section 2(23) of the income-tax act, 1961, ' firm', 'partner ' and 'partnership' have the meanings respectively assigned to them in the indian partnership act, 1932. according to the indian partnership act each and every partner is jointly and severally liable for the debts of the firm. moreover, under order 21, ..... partners of the firm under the income-tax act is the same as what is provided under the partnership act. reference has been made to the provisions contained in section 25 of the partnership act. section 2(23) of the act reads as follows :' 'firm ', 'partner' and 'partnership' have the meanings respectively assigned to them in the indian partnership act, 1932; but the expression 'partner' shall ..... also include any person who, being a minor, has been admitted to the benefits of partnership. '20. it was also argued by the ..... court felt that the amount due from the firm could not have been recovered from the partners to whom there had been no notice, either under the indian income-tax act or under the partnership act. starting from the last paragraph : [1969]72itr617(sc) of the above decision, the observation is as follows :' the phrase ' other person liable to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 23 1975 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. G.D. Kothari

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jul-23-1975

Reported in : [1977]110ITR691(Cal)

..... share income of a partner is a unit by itself coming under section 10 of the act and disintegration of it, as done by the income-tax officer in this case, is unwarranted. referring to the relevant provisions of the income-tax act, 1922, and the indian partnership act, 1932, learned counsel has submitted that a partner's share in the income of the firm ..... is really his share of profit in carrying on partnership and, as such, it is assessable under section 10 of the act under the head ' profits, and gains of business, profession or ..... court further observed (pages 59, 60):'where a person carries on business by himself or in partnership with others, profits and gains earned by him are income liable to be taxed under section 10 of the indian income-tax act, 1922. share in the profits of a partnership received by a partner is ' profits and gains of business ' carried on by him and is ..... to be taxed under section 10 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, as observed by the supreme court. in our view, for the purpose of assessing the share income of the partners under various heads from which the partnership derived its income, section 67(2) of the act has been introduced in the income-tax act, 1961. the fact that the share income of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 1975 (HC)

Premsukh Ganeshmull Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Mar-17-1975

Reported in : [1977]106ITR1004(Cal)

..... contention of dr. pal.7. this being the true construction of this deed, it leads us to the submission of dr. pal, namely, that under section 13(b) of the indian partnership act, 1932, those minors have equal shares in their collective share, but the minors are not the partners of the firm and, therefore, section 13(b), in our opinion, has no ..... following the decisions of the supreme court mentioned earlier and by applying section 13 of the indian partnership act in the facts and circumstances of that case. but, as already stated, section 13 of the indian partnership act and those two decisions of the supreme court do not in any way help the assessee-firm before us. and, in our opinion, no reliance can be placed ..... assessment year 1960-61, and it arises out of the registration proceedings under section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922. the assessee is a firm constituted under a deed of partnership dated april 28, 1959. the minor sons of a deceased partner, namely, hiralal chhajer, were admitted to the benefits of this ..... deb, j.1. this is a reference under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, and the question is as follows ;'whether, on the facts aqd in the circumstances of the case, and having regard to the terms of the deed of partnership dated april 26, 1959, the firm constituted thereunder was eligible for registration ?'2. the reference relates to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 25 1975 (HC)

Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M. Venkata Narasimha Rao and Co.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-25-1975

Reported in : [1976]104ITR28(AP)

..... relevant facts taken together. it follows from sections 4 and 6 of the indian partnership act that under the law of partnership a firm has no legal existence apart from its partners and it is merely a compendious name to describe its partners. (vide commissioner of income-tax v ..... one another are called individually 'partners' and collectively a firm', and the name under which their business is carried on is called the ' firm name'.' section 6 of the indian partnership act provides that in determining whether a group of persons is or is not a firm, regard shall be had to the real relation between the parties as shown by all ..... said that the two firms were one and the same.5. now, section 2(23) of the income-tax act of 1961 defines 'firm.' as having the meaning assigned to that expression in the indian partnership act, 1932. section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, defines 'partnership 'as' the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or ..... in order xxx, rule 1, civil procedure code. if parliament intended that a firm should be treated as a legal personality under the income-tax act it was wholly unnecessary for parliament to have defined 'firm' by reference to the indian partnership act. what we wish to emphasise is that a firm, which may be a taxable entity, does not on that account acquire or become .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 1975 (HC)

Tarak Nath Sen and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Mar-14-1975

Reported in : AIR1975Cal337

..... the indian partnership act goes further than the english partnership act, 1890, in recognising that a firm may possess a personality distinct from the persons constituting it, the law in india in that respect being more in accordance ..... apart from the partners. the learned judge in : [1956]29itr535(sc) (supra) also held: 'in our opinion the word 'persons' in section 4 of the indian partnership act, which has replaced section 239 of the indian contract act, contemplated only natural or artificial, i. e., legal persons and for the reasons stated above, a firm is not a 'person' and as such is not ..... '.'14. the judicial committee of the privy council in bhagwanji morarji goculdas v. alembic chemical works co. ltd., air 1948 pc 100 while considering the submission that under the indian partnership act, 1932 a firm is recognised as a personality apart from the persons constituting it so long as the business of the firm continued had observed that 'it is true that ..... association of individuals cannot be applied in respect of the proceedings under chapter xvi for confiscation of goods and conveyances and imposition of penalties.13. the word 'partnership' has been defined in section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932 as:'.....the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 14 1975 (HC)

Phulchand Ratanlal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Guwahati

Decided on : May-14-1975

..... a partnership were not considered as discussed hereinabove. but some materials were considered which are not very relevant for the purpose. some circumstances were considered which may at best ..... the returns of income submitted for the assessment years 1961-62 and 1962-63.6. it is common case that a partnership firm may be formed even without a written document. section 4 of the indian partnership act defines 'partnership' as follows: 'partnership' is the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any ..... of them acting for all.'7. thus, to form a partnership there must be an agreement between the partners to share the profits of ..... constitute a partnership-firm it is not necessary that there must always be a written document putting therein the terms of the partnership. on a consideration of the materials on record we find that, in arriving at the conclusion that the assessee could not establish its status as a firm, the legal requirements under section 4 of the indian partnership act to constitute .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 27 1975 (HC)

Rattan Lal Ahluwalia Vs. Jai Janinder Parshad

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-27-1975

Reported in : AIR1976P& H200

..... her. she, however, admitted that she used to consult her husband (the respondent) whenever she could not understand any word. therefore, relying on section 16(a) of the indian partnership act (hereinafter called the act), and tbe judgment reported in abdul razaak v. mashiruddin ahmad, air 1959 gal 660, the learned counsel for the appellant urged that the income derived by shrimati sushila goyal ..... facts alleged by the respondent were admitted by the appellant. he, however, contested the suit on the pleas that he was a sleeping partner and had simply financed the partnership business while the respondent was a working partner, that the dissolution deed was vitiated by fraud and misrepresentation, and the respondent had defrauded him by misrepresenting state of things which ..... 2 of the replication that the ashoka guide had been published by his wife eleven months after dissolution of the partnership business. shrimati sushila goyal affirmed categorically in her statement that the ashoka guide had been published ..... my opinion, be termed as the property of the said partnership. so, the mere fact that some knowledge or information might have been given by the respondent to his wife shrimati sushila goyal, or to her employee -- shri b. d. kapur, cannot attract the provisions of section 16(a) of the act. further, the respondent stated in the middle of para. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 1975 (HC)

Mettupalayam Industrial Roadways (P.) Ltd. and anr. Vs. Thiru Mohamed ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-19-1975

Reported in : (1976)1MLJ446

..... should be taken to have been dissolved by the death of mohammed ismail, one of the partners. the learned counsel refers to section 42 of the indian partnership act which provides that subject to a contract to the contrary between the parties a firm is dissolved by death of a partner. it is not in ..... v. dalichand , the court has also taken the same view and the reasoning contained therein is as follows:it is true that section 42 of the partnership act provides that a firm is dissolved by the death of a partner. it must, however, be remembered that this would be subject to contract between the ..... to be a direct decision on the point in question. it is well-established that an agreement to the contrary contemplated by section 42 of the partnership act need not be in writing but can also be oral. it is equally well-established that such an agreement need not be express but can be ..... fact as leads to the inference of an agreement to the contrary.but the above case related to the interpretation of section 42(b) of the partnership act dealing with the dissolution of the firm by completion of an adventure and, therefore, the said decision that from the mere existence of an adventure one ..... 52mlj318 . in that case the court expressed the view that though a contract to the contrary within the meaning of section 253 of the contract act (section 42 of the partnership act) need not always be express and can be inferred from certain facts, the mere existence of an adventure is not such a fact leading to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 05 1975 (HC)

Jawaharlal Khandelwal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Dec-05-1975

Reported in : [1977]110ITR884(Orissa)

..... bound by the contract to which he was not a party. section 187 applies only where a firm is re-constituted in accordance with sections 31 and 32 of the indian partnership act. where a firm is dissolved either by agreement or by operation of law and another firm rakes over the business, the case would be governed by section 188 of ..... indicativeof the existence of two different assessees, is also not correct. in myopinion, the appellate assistant commissioner was unjustified to direct theincome-tax officer to grant continuation of the partnership for the periodup to august 31, 1968......'7. learned standing counsel relied upon the andnra pradesh decision while mr. pasayat for the assessee placed reliance on two decisions, one ..... of individualscompendiously referred to as partners was carried on despite the death ofone of the partners in the same name and style with the minor admitted tothe benefits of the partnership and with varied share ratio. the assessee-counsel's further submission that the treatment accorded to the status,namely, ' registered firm ' as well as 'unregistered firm ', is clearly ..... but two accounts were prepared for the periodsending august 31, 1968, and october 31, 1968. it was claimed that distribution of profit among the original partners and the reconstituted partnership had also been made. the tribunal, however, relied upon the decisionof the andhra pradqsh high court and came to hold that the appellateassistant commissioner was not justified in upholding the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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