Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Year: 1983 Page 1 of about 173 results (0.085 seconds)

Oct 04 1983 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Poona Vs. E.H. Kathawala and Co.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-04-1983

Reported in : (1984)38CTR(Bom)194; [1985]151ITR348(Bom); [1984]16TAXMAN138(Bom)

..... and the successor firm.10. in our opinion, the legal position will have to be ascertained with reference to the provisions of the indian partnership act. section 42 of the indian partnership act provides that a firm is dissolved by the death of a partner, but this is made subject to a contract to the contrary ..... constitution of a firm. in our opinion, however, the correct legal position will have to be ascertained with reference to the provisions of the indian partnership act and the decision given must rest on the particular facts of each case. these decisions then may not have any general application and need not, ..... between the partners. we have already mentioned that we find no express provision, i.e., a contract to the contrary, in the partnership deed dated october ..... conduct of the surviving partners and the heirs of the deceased partner, after his death, may reflect the original intention of the founders of the partnership. the taking up as a partner of a son of the deceased partner in his stead and the continuation of the firm without dissolution is ..... at kolhapur in the name and style of e. h. kathawala & co. it carries on business in jaggery and acts as commission agents. it was first constituted under a deed of partnership executed in october, 1949. from time to time, the constitution of the firm has undergone various changes. we are .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 13 1983 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras Vs. R. Sithan Chetty Sons

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-13-1983

Reported in : [1984]145ITR306(Mad)

..... in that case it has been held that s. 187 applies only where a firm is reconstituted in accordance with ss. 31 and 32 of the indian partnership act, but where the firm is dissolved either by agreement of the partners or by operation of law and another firm takes over the business, that will ..... continue as one and single throughout the period, and that, therefore, in cases where the firm ceases to exist as contemplated by s. 42 of the partnership act, the relationship of the partners inter se comes to an end and thereafter the firm can not longer be said to continue as before. the court ..... according to clause 5 of the said deed. it was provided that in all matters not provided in the deed the provision of the india partnership act would apply. subsequently rangaswamy chettiar and venkatarama chettiar are to have represented their respective branches as partners in the said firm. however, on november 30 ..... (n) estate tea factory v. addl. cit : [1978]112itr715(mad) . in that case four of the five partners of the firm retired from the partnership on june 30, 1970, after executing a release deed under the which the remaining partner took over the right and liabilities of the firm. on the same day ..... has sought and obtained this reference on the question set out above. 4. the following facts are not in dispute in this case. by a deed of partnership dated april 1, 1972, a firm was constituted under the name of m/s. r. sithan chetty sons comprising of two partners, s. rangaswamy chettiar and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 23 1983 (HC)

Mohatta Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat, Ahmedabad

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Nov-23-1983

Reported in : [1985]153ITR247(Guj)

..... we are of the opinion that the factors which have been considered by the ito or the tribunal cannot conclude the matter. section 42 of the indian partnership act provides that a firm is dissolved, inter alia, upon the death of a partner subject to a contract to the contrary between the partners. the principle ..... 's case decided by the allahabad high court was one under s. 26 of the indian i.t. act, 1922, where the allahabad high court held that assuming that the death of the partner did not dissolve the partnership firm which continued even thereafter, it was impossible for the surviving partners to certify as required ..... -tax law also, the concept of a change in the constitution of a firm is interpreted on the same lines as in the partnership law, though s. 187 of the act of 1961 clearly specifies as to what would amount to a change in the constitution of a firm. the meaning which has been ..... to enable the ito to grant registration as provided in s. 184(8) of the act of 1961. the fact of a change in constitution of the firm can thus be established by producing the original partnership deed which was executed between the surviving partners and the deceased partner and also by production ..... that the profit or loss arose when the accounts were closed; and since no fresh partnership deed was executed, the firm was dissolved and the registration originally granted cannot be continued under s. 184(2) of the act. the assessee took the matter in appeal to the aac, who following the decision of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 05 1983 (HC)

Girdharilal Nannelal and Sukhlal Jhamaklal Vs. Commissioner of Income- ...

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-05-1983

Reported in : [1984]147ITR529(MP)

..... , then the meaning of section 187 cannot be curtailed to exclude such a situation from its ambit simply because the general law contained in the indian partnership act undoubtedly contemplates continued existence of the firm at the time of the change in its constitution. the real difference in the conflicting views is in ..... of ' dissolution ' and ' change in the constitution of a firm ' according to the general law contained in the indian partnership act is, therefore, not warranted.9. section 188 of the i.t. act, 1961, provides for cases of succession of one firm by another and excludes from its ambit the cases covered by section ..... by the learned counsel for the assessee that sections 187, 188 and 189 must be construed harmoniously with the indian partnership act, 1932, and sub-section (2)(a) of section 187 of the i.t. act should not be construed to include the case of succession of one firm after it is dissolved by another firm ..... the other view is that it merely supplements the provisions of the general law contained in the indian partnership act, even in this respect.17. in view of the construction we have made of section 187 of the i.t. act, 1961, as indicated earlier, we express our concurrence with the decision in vimal and amar talkies ..... wide enough to include within its ambit a situation which is ordinarily that of dissolution of a firm under the indian partnership act, as a result of one only of the old partners remaining at the time of the change to continue the business .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 19 1983 (HC)

In Re: Canara Bank, Siddharth Kumar Modi and Others Vs. Jagjit Singh B ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-19-1983

Reported in : AIR1984Delhi116; [1985]57CompCas631(Delhi)

..... 8. the learned counsel for the applicant has referred to ss. 26, 27 and 45 of the indian partnership act, 1932, which read as under : '26. where, by the wrongful act or omission of partner acting in the ordinary course of the business of a firm, or with the authority of his partners, ..... of deciding the disputes between the plaintiffs and the defendant. the disputes between the plaintiffs and the defendant are only regarding the existence of partnership and whether the firm should be dissolved and the defendant be directed to render accounts. i do not appreciate how the presence of the ..... shall be served on the new defendant and, if the court thinks fit, on the original defendant. (5) subject to the provisions of the indian limitation act, 1877, section 22, the proceedings as against any person added as defendant shall be deemed to have begun only on the service of the summons ..... plaintiffs and the defendant. the plaintiffs, thereforee, filed the present suit for dissolution of the partnership and rendition of accounts. 2. the applicant-bank by this application alleges that the partnership firm, m/s. tantra, acting through its partners, i.e., the plaintiffs and the defendant, approached the applicant for grant ..... sub-section (1) may be given by any partner.' 9. these provisions show that if an act on behalf of a firm has been done by a partner during the continuance of the partnership, the other partners would also be liable to the third party. according to the allegations contained in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 14 1983 (HC)

Jansons Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Dec-14-1983

Reported in : (1984)41CTR(Kar)3; [1985]154ITR432(KAR); [1985]154ITR432(Karn); [1984]17TAXMAN330(Kar)

..... the question is whether this material is sufficient to vest the properties in the individual partners as their separate properties. section 14 of the indian partnership act provides as to how a firm could become the owner of a property. property of the firm includes all property and rights and interests ..... on this question is of the allahabad high court in ram narain's case : [1969]73itr423(all) . by following the principles under the english partnership act, it was observed therein that mere book entries do not have the effect of converting the property of the firm into the personal property of the ..... brothers v. cit : [1969]73itr423(all) . the tribunal held that a transfer of the firm's property during the continuance of the partnership cannot be the subject matter of a mutual agreement between the partners followed by making mere book entries, and it must be evidenced by a ..... of immovable properties, we do not think that any other view is possible. mere entries in the account books of the partnership firm proprio vigore will not convert partnership property into individual property of the partners or of third parties. nor the agreement dated june 30, 1970, entered in to ..... be converted into partners' personal property except by means of an instrument in writing in accordance with the requirements of the transfer of property act and the registration act ?' 2. the facts behind these legal formulation are : the assessee is a firm of four partners. the property bearing municipal nos. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 1983 (HC)

Gandhi Company Vs. Krishna Glass Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-22-1983

Reported in : (1983)85BOMLR179; 1983MhLJ1036

..... that the plaintiff firm of which one rasiklal n. gandhi is a partner is not registered in accordance with the previsions of section 69 of the indian partnership act, 1932. this fact came to light only at the time of hearing of the suit in february/ march, 1983, when a zerox copy ..... has been held in govindmal gianchand v. kunj biharilal (1953) 56 bom. l.r. 348, that the requirements prescribed by section 69 of the indian partnership act cannot be waived by the defendants. tendolkar j. has observed in his aforesaid judgment that the provisions of section 69 are mandatory and there is no ..... was on that occasion that it was submitted that the suit as filed suffered from non-compliance with the mandatory requirements of section 69 of the indian partnership act and was liable to be dismissed. on march 15, 1983 the issues were settled and issue as to non-registration of the firm and the ..... alia, stated that the plaintiffs are a partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act. it is stated further that they, inter alia, carry on business of supply of silica, sand, dolomite limestone and other minerals.3. in ..... to-day has been placed on board for determination of the preliminary issues.2. the suit is filed by gandhi company, described as a partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act and carrying on business at 90/92, kazi syed street, bombay-400 003 br, in para one of the plaint it is, inter .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 23 1983 (HC)

Vishwanath Seth Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-23-1983

Reported in : [1984]146ITR249(All)

..... but their shares are altered that will still be a case of reconstitution. but this provision does not change the concept of reconstitution of a firm as understood in the indian partnership act nor does it obliterate the distinction between reconstitution and dissolution.'49. similarly in sant lal's case : [1982]136itr379(delhi) , it was observed (p. 390):'in our opinion the purpose ..... the income for the entire previous year. in our opinion, this is the correct legal position.37. it thus appears that under the general law of partnership under the indian partnership act as well as under the i.t. acts, the position is that a firm retains its identity and assessable entity in case of its reconstitution. it is hence the same person. if the ..... persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all (s. 4 of the indian partnership act). incoming, outgoing, expulsion, insolvency, etc., of a partner are dealt with in chap. v of the indian partnership act whereas death of a partner, unsoundness of mind, incapability to perform duties, etc., are dealt in chap. vi. consequences ..... even in reconstitution of a firm there should be two assessment orders.45. as firm and partners under the i.t. act have to be understood in the sense assigned to it under the indian partnership act (s. 2(23) of the i.t, act), it may be examined whether a firm stands reconstituted or dissolved on death of a partner. section 4 of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 1983 (HC)

Nagji Vallabhaji and Co. Vs. Meghji Vijpar and Co. and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-31-1983

Reported in : 1983(2)BomCR140

..... raised. amongst other issues framed, the suit was sought to be defeated on several grounds such as the plaintiff-firm not being registered under the indian partnership act; non-joinder of kanji vijpar was fatal to the suit; that the sub-tenancy of the defendant had not been brought to an end and ..... co-owners viz. meghji vijpar. he held that there was no question of any registration of partnership firm since this is a suit on title, and was not for enforcement of any contract, to which the indian partnership act was attracted. as he held that the sub-tenancy was for a term, which expired on ..... the defendants. though, mr. advani conceded that later documents produced on record went to suggest that the godown in question was property of the partnership firm of the partners dealing with it, still he submitted that what is necessary to be found is that with whom the contract of sub- ..... consisted of two partners meghji vijpar and kanji vajpar. that kanji vijpar retired from the partnership in the year 1963 and meghji and ratansi continued as its partners. ratansi also died and now the dissolved partnership business was owned by the sole proprietor meghji. according to the terms and conditions of ..... government, the sub-lease thereof could be created. as between such tenants and sub-tenants, the relationship would be governed by the bombay rent act. the learned counsel submitted that it was not necessary to investigate and enquire, nor any question arose in such a contingency as to whether the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 1983 (HC)

Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-iii Vs. Manjeet Engineeri ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Dec-19-1983

Reported in : ILR1984Delhi787; [1985]154ITR509(Delhi)

..... of the firm and arjun singh as relied on by the revenue. it was submitted by shri wadhera, learned counsel for the revenue, that as per s. 14 of the indian partnership act, bringing of property by a partner into the stock of the firm is subject to contract between the partners i.e., the property can be brought by a partners into ..... of prem raj brahmin v. bhani ram brahmin [1946] 1 cal 191 , on an examination of the relevant provisions of indian contract act, 1872, and the indian partnership act, 1932, including s. 14 of that act, came to the conclusion that under the provisions of those two acts, a written document and, consequently, registration is not necessary to bring in separate properties of the partners into the ..... partnership stock. it was further held that by virtue of ss. 239, 253 and 265 of the indian contract act and ss. 14 and 46 of the indian partnership act, they become the properties of the firm as soon as the partners intend to so bring them in ..... stock of the firm as evidenced by the passing of the necessary entries in the books of the firm, that was against the terms of the partnership as evidenced by the deed of partnership and further that under s. 14 of the indian partnership act as relied upon by the assessed, an immovable property could not be transferred by a partner in favor of the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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