Court : Kerala
Decided on : Nov-03-1987
Reported in : 200ITR161(Ker)
..... individual otherwise than for adequate consideration or in connection with an agreement to live apart.' 61. kochu thommen j. (as he then was), held that a firm under the indian partnership act, 1932, is not a distinct legal entity apart from the partners constituting it and the firm's property or assets are only the property or assets of the partners and ..... of the firm. the basic ruling in this regard is the decision of the supreme court in addanki narayanappa v. bhaskara krishnappa : 3scr400 . considering the scheme of the indian partnership act, mudholkar j., who delivered the judgment, observed that no partner can claim any exclusive right over the the properties which become the assets of the firm from whatever source they ..... : 105itr144(ker) . a abdul rahim, travancore confectionery works v. cit : 110itr595(ker) . it is also well-established that (at page 49 of 120 itr) 'a partnership firm, under the indian partnership act, 1932, is not a distinct legal entity apart from the partners constituting it and equally in law the firm as such has no separate rights of its own in ..... the properties and that, upon dissolution, to a share in the proceeds of sale of the partnership assets, after all such payments contemplated under section 48 of the indian partnership act have been met. section 29 of the indian partnership act, however, provides that, even during the subsistence of the partnership, a partner may assign his share to another but the right of the assignee is only .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-10-1987
Reported in : AIR1988SC757; (1988)67CTR(SC)43; 169ITR761(SC); JT1987(4)SC349; 1987(2)SCALE1078; 1988Supp(1)SCC193; 1988(Supp)SCC193; 1SCR917
..... v. addl. commr. of income-tax : 115itr858(all) . this full bench ruled that under the general law of partnership under the indian partnership act as well as under section 187 of the act in case of reconstitution of a firm it retains its identity and is assessable in respect of the entire previous year. in view ..... with 17 members. the said deed provided, inter alia, as follows:that where the deed is silent, it shall be governed by the indian partnership act save and except that on the death or demise of any partner the firm shall not be dissolved but shall be carried on with ..... , however, under the scheme of chap. xvi of the act, we are unable to agree; if we were left with general position under the indian partnership act, we might have agreed. that decision of the high court, however, did not deal with the controversy in ..... agreement to treat the firm as continuing notwithstanding the death of a partner, the partners have no option to treat the firm as continuing under the partnership act, 1932, the firm gets dissolved and the income-tax officer is not entitled to ignore this consequence. there is nothing in the language of section ..... from the date other than that of the execution of the instrument and also the terms and conditions on which the partnership had been and was being carried on. the indian income-tax act, 1922, required the income-tax officer to certify and.register the deed itself and the registration of the firm would .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Mar-04-1987
Reported in : (1987)63CTR(All)345; 166ITR698(All); 31TAXMAN495(All)
..... any partner. in the absence of such a clause, it may be necessary to determine the position emerging as a result of the law contained under the provisions of the indian partnership act. in such a situation, the conduct of the surviving partners may also be relevant. in view of the changed position in the law and in the absence of material and ..... of the income for the entire previous year. in our opinion, this is the correct legal position. it thus appears that under the general law of partnership under the indian partnership act as well as under the income-tax acts, the position is that a firm retains its identity and assessable entity in case of its reconstitution. it is hence the same person. ' 8. thus ..... of the firm, died on june 10, 1979, and smt. quamarunnisa retired from the firm. the remaining three partners along with saghir ahmad and athar hussain entered into a new partnership to carry on business from june 11, 1979. the assessee-firm filed two returns of income, one for the period april 1, 1979, to june 10, 1979, and the other ..... separate assessments for the aforesaid two periods. the income-tax officer was of the opinionthat the assessee's case was fully covered by the provisions of section 187 of the act and, therefore, there should be one single assessment for both the periods. after working out the income of the two periods separately, the income-tax officer framed one consolidated assessment .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Oct-16-1987
Reported in : AIR1988Bom187
..... date of death, retirement or insolvency shall be deducted from the amount standing to his credit.20. on the dissolution of the partnership, the business shall be wound up and the assets thereof sold as provided by the indian partnership act or any other statutory modification or re-enactment thereof for the time being in force provided that each partner shall be at liberty ..... ) whether the plaintiff is entitled to any reliefs, and if so, what reliefs?6. under clause 2 of the partnership deed the partnership shall continue unless dissolved or determined by and with the mutual consent of all partners. under section 40 of the indian partnership act, 1932 'a firm may be dissolved with the consent of all partners or in accordance with a contract between ..... the partners.' in the present case, the parties have contracted that the partnership shall continue unless it is dissolved by mutual consent of all the partners. there ..... to bid at any sale of the partnership assets.'2. on or about 4th march, 1975 kantilal ochhavlal sheth, who was one of the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-25-1987
Reported in : AIR1988Delhi88; 32(1987)DLT297
..... the certified copy of the entries in the register of firms.it shows that m/s. khedut oil cake industries was duly registered under the indian partnership act. it further shows that mansukhlal punjabhai was one of its registered partners. mansukhlal, pw-1 deposed that he had signed theplaint at points a ..... (1) m/s. khedut oil cake industries, plaintiff no. 1, andm/s. khedul oil traders, plaintiff no. 2, are partnership firms stated to be registered under the indian partnership act. on 21/06/1969 plaintiffno, 1 tendered 281 .20 quintals of refined ground nut oil to the western railways at dhoraji factory siding ..... 80 was claimed towards interest.(5) the suit was resisted by the defendants. the allegation that the plaintiff firms were duly registered under the partnership act was denied. it was averred that the suit was barred by time. on merits it was alleged thatthe loss of consignment had occurred because ..... years. time begins to run from the date when the good sought to be delivered (see art. 11 of the indian limitation act).section 15(2) of the indian limitation act provides that in computing the period of limitation for any suit of which notice has been given in accordance with the ..... of the goods.the railway administration was thus not liable for the alleged loss in view of the provisions contained in section 73 of the indian railways act. allegation of negligence and misconduct on the part of the railway employees were alsodenied.(6) on the pleadings of the parties the following issue .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jul-30-1987
Reported in : 170ITR503(Raj)
..... the death of one of the partners of the firm, it stood dissolved by operation of law, according to section 42 of the indian partnership act and, therefore, it was a case of succession governed by section 188 of the act and not of a mere change in the constitution of the firm governed by section 187. this view of the tribunal has given ..... of the general principle of dissolution of a firm on the death of a partner contained in section 42(c) of the indian partnership act. for the same reason, the proviso inserted in section (2) of section 187 of the income-tax act, 1961, retrospectively with effect from april 1, 1975, has no application for the reasons given by us in d.b. income ..... is no dissolution of the firm on the death of any of its partners on account of a contract to the contrary in the partnership deed, the said proviso inserted in section (2) of section 187 of the act not being applicable, it is a case governed by section 187 since it is merely a case of a change in the constitution ..... not a change in constitution and that section 187 of the income-tax act, 1961, does not govern cases of this type ?'2. the assessee-firm consisted of three partners constituted by a deed of partnership dated may 14, 1965. one of the terms of the deed was that the partnership would not stand dissolved on the death of any of its partners .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Oct-12-1987
Reported in : 1987(3)BomCR620
..... not accept the correctness of the observation made by oudh high court. mr. dhanuka then submitted that provisions of section 68 of the indian partnership act should be limited its application to third parties and should not be considered while examining the rights of the partners in the suit. it ..... of the parties claimed that the mistake has been committed. in our judgment, it is difficult to construe provisions of section 68 of the indian partnership act as merely a rule of evidence which is rebuttable because the power has been conferred on the registrar to rectify the mistake. mr. dhanuka ..... the parties challenging the statement to rebut the correctness of the same. the learned counsel referred to the provisions of section 64 of the indian partnership act which enable the registrar to rectify any mistake in order to bring the entry in the register of firm in conformity with the documents ..... firm. the statement is required to be signed by all the partners and also verify the same in the manner prescribed. section 68 of the indian partnership act provides :'any statement, intimation or notice recorded or note in the register of firms shall, as against any person by whom or on whose behalf ..... on december 28, 1980, the partners filed a statement before the registrar of firms in the prescribed form provided under section 58 of the indian partnership act and the registrar duly registered the firm on march 2, 1981. on october 8, 1984 the plaintiff served a telegraphic notice on the defendants .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Aug-31-1987
Reported in : 1987(2)WLN778
..... individual signing. the decisions cited by him shall be looked into but his contentions are that the negotiable instruments act prevails over the indian contract act as well as the indian partnership act and the liability will be that of the person signing the pronote even if the amount has been utilised by ..... to bind a firm, an act or instrument done or executed by a partner or other person on ..... it could not be made liable because the executant did not act in a manner expressing or implying an intention to bind the firm.16. section 22 of the indian partnership act provides for the manner in which an act or instrument can bind a firm. it says that in order ..... the firm. the contentions about the payment made by shri r.k. gupta shall be considered later on.10. in madangopal v. narsingndas & sons air 1951 rajasthan 64 considering section 28 of the negotiable instruments act ..... the firm. the other partners were not made liable and it was held that the provisions of the negotiable instruments act would prevail over those of the partnership act and the contract act.15. in thummala rama rao and ors. v. chodage venkateshwara rao and ors. : air1963ap154 , a promissory note .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Apr-29-1987
Reported in : (1987)89BOMLR248
..... which has a bearing on the crucial issue figuring before me recited-under the existing entry 19 in the schedule i to the act, firms registered under the indian partnership act, 1932 (ix of 1932) and engaged in any profession, trade or calling are required to pay tax. but in many registered ..... state tax on professions, trades, callings and employments act, 1975, a profession tax of rs. 150/-per annum is leviable on partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act, 1932 and engaged in any profession., trade or callings, instead of levying the profession tax on partnership firms, i propose to levy the profession tax ..... firms some of the partners, who are not covered under any entry of the schedule to the act, are otherwise not paying the tax. with a view to cover such partners of the firms under the act ..... moved against registered dealers calling upon them to pay tax as per entry no. 8, although the dealer was a firm registered under the partnership act, each of whose partner may have already paid tax under entry no. 19. this was challenged in appeal no. 55 of 1985 by ..... by article 276 of the constitution. the charging provision is section 3 read with schedule 1. until mid august 1985, a firm registered under the partnership act was liable to pay tax (professional tax) at rate rs. 150/- per annum. this led to anomalies- so.felt the taxman - and to .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Pune
Decided on : Feb-04-1987
Reported in : (1987)21ITD377(Pune.)
..... the approval of the state medical council. besides, as mentioned above, the main thrust of the dr's argument is regarding the execution of the partnership contract with the intention of defeating the provisions of law.15. quoting from moitra on indian partnership act, 2nd edition page 20, shri bhide contended that as a general rule, where the law imposes penalty for doing an ..... act, the agreement to do things so prohibited is not unlawful under section 23 of the indian contract act. but where the statute prohibits absoletely contract may fail in view of ..... from retail liquor business run in the name of novelty wine mart. thus, what has been done in the garb of partnership contract amounts to an action to defeat the purpose and provision of law. section 23 of the indian contract act on this point, as pointed out by the departmental representative would thus be squarely applicable. the d.r's contention regarding ..... says so. it is futile to expect in a prohibition law all possible situations regarding partnership. the issue has to be examined from the indian contract act's viewpoint. further, the aac erred in holding that the test of legality is only with reference to the object of the partnership being contrary to the law. as already mentioned above, even if the object is .....Tag this Judgment!