Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Year: 1988 Page 1 of about 145 results (0.061 seconds)

May 05 1988 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sri Krishna Re-rolling Mills

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-05-1988

Reported in : (1988)70CTR(Raj)175; [1989]175ITR366(Raj); 1988(2)WLN128

..... with the remaining partners together with the heir and representative of the deceased partner. it was expressly held that (at p. 765) 'by virtue of section 42(c) of the indian partnership act, 1932, a firm was dissolved by the death of a partner but as the section provided, that was subject to the contract between the partners.' reference was also made in ..... is distinguishable forany reason.7. as already indicated, there was a contract to the contrary in the partnership deed as a result of which the partnership firm did not stand dissolved in accordance with the general principle contained in section 42(c) of the indian partnership act on the death of two of the six partners. this is also evident from the fact that the ..... together with the heir of the deceased partner being taken in as a partner. it is the terms of this partnership deed which governed the case at the time of death of the two partners. clause (c) of section 42 of the indian partnership act, 1932, which lays down the general principle of dissolution of a firm on the death of a partner is ..... , the firm shall not stand dissolved ; and so in view of section 42(c) of the indian partnership act, after the death of a partner, the firm automatically stands dissolved. this is the only basis on which the tribunal has come to the conclusion that the partnership firm stood dissolved on the death of the two partners. this finding is not based on any .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 24 1988 (HC)

N. Satyanarayana Murthy and ors. Vs. M. Venkata Bala Krishnamurthy

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-24-1988

Reported in : AIR1989AP167

..... the statement of accounts pursuant to ex.a6 is not correct, the respondent was unilaterally expelled from the partnership with effect from march 1, 1976; it is illegal, void and hit by section 32 of the indian partnership act (act 9 of 1932) (for short 'the act'), the 1st appellant mismanaged the affairs of the business of the firm, caused great prejudice to the respondent ..... partners; (2) by an action brought out by one partner against the other for the purpose of dissolving the partnership. in the foot-note it is stated that a proposal for a dissolution, not accepted, is not a dissolution.' 17. mukerji on indian partnership act,3rd edition, 1974 at page 370 para 22, thescope of the word 'just and equitable undersection 44(g) ..... has not been defined precisely, hasstated thus -'but, it is submitted, that the court's power to act under this sub-section is virtually unlimited and cannot be restricted to the ..... by forcibly retiring him from the firm without any authority, the respondent lost confidence in the management by the 1st appellant; and accordingly directed dissolution of the partnership with effect from feb .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 23 1988 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Basant Behari Gopal Behari and Company

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Feb-23-1988

Reported in : (1988)70CTR(All)11; [1988]172ITR662(All); [1988]39TAXMAN194(All)

..... observed towards the end (at p. 777 of 169 itr):'the 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 the case of reconstitution of a firm, it retains its identity and is assessable in respect of the entire ..... previous year. in view, however, of the scheme of chapter xvi of the act, we are unable to agree ; if we were left with the general position under the indian partnership act, we might have agreed. that decision of the high court, however, did not deal with the controversy ..... and the inclusion of fariduddin involved a change in the constitution of the firm and, therefore, it was necessary that a fresh deed of partnership should have been executed as well as a fresh application for registration filed. the tribunal, however, accepted the alternative contention and observed that the ..... the tribunal, the assessee urged that the change which occurred on the death of qamaruddin did not require the execution of a new deed of partnership nor a fresh application for registration. alternatively, it was contended that the assessee was entitled to the continued benefit of registration at least for ..... june 4, 1964, one of the partners, qamaruddin, died and his son, fariduddin, joined the firm as a partner. a new deed of partnership evidencing the change in the constitution of the firm was not executed during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1965-66. the assessee filed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 1988 (HC)

M.O.H. Aslam Vs. M.O.H Uduman and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-17-1988

Reported in : (1989)2MLJ172

..... argued that the only remedy for the appellant/plaintiff will be to ask for dissolution of the firm as contemplated under section 44 of the indian partnership act...again in para. 14, it is stated:.now, the stand taken by the plaintiff is that whatever be the provisions under the french code ..... could be exercised only when all the partners agree for dissolution. the word 'all' is nowhere used either in the french code civil or indian partnership act. in the absence of agreement between the parties, in such of those cases where section 7 gets applied, the right of dissolution would be ..... retirement as distinct and different rights inhering in a partner, under different circumstances. there are provisions in the french code civil and in the indian partnership act dealing with right of dissolution, and the right of retirement, as distinct rights. hence, merely because a clause relating to retirement is found is ..... contrary to the intention of the parties in clause 5 of exhibit b.1. regarding arguments advanced about invocation of section 44 of the indian partnership act, after referring to it in two places in the judgment, it was held that even on principles of justice and fair-play, it ..... not to dissolve the firm? it then dealt with the next contention of the plaintiff regarding dissolution under section 44(d) and (g) of indian partnership act, after referring to the decisions cited by both the plaintiff and defendants, it concluded that the principle laid down in, v.m. nissar ahmed ahmed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 18 1988 (TRI)

income-tax Officer Vs. Dr. C. Kurshid

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras

Decided on : Aug-18-1988

Reported in : (1989)28ITD34(Mad.)

..... the intention of the two partners of the firm of batoola hospital to treat this property as the property of the firm within the meaning of section 14 of the indian partnership act. as stated already, it is now well settled by decisions of the supreme court and of the madras and andhra pradesh high courts referred to above, that no formal document ..... no registration was necessary when a partner brings in immovable property as his capital contribution to the firm.6. we have carefully considered the rival contentions. section 14 of the indian partnership act, 1932 reads as under:-- 14. the property of the firm.--subject to contract between the partners, the property of the firm includes all property and rights and interests in property ..... book entries made show the intention to treat the property as the property of the firm but it is not sufficient to satisfy the test in section 14 of the indian partnership act, 1932, wherein, special transfer of property is involved whereby the individual partner divests his exclusive interest in the property contributed as initial capital for share interest in the net ..... treat the property as the property of the firm, yet it was not sufficient to satisfy the requirements of section 14 of the indian partnership act, when no formalities to be complied with are laid down therein. section 14 of the indian partnership act laid down as to what is the meaning of the property of the firm. it has laid down that, subject to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 30 1988 (HC)

income-tax Officer Vs. G. Sharma BaruA.

Court : Guwahati

Decided on : Nov-30-1988

..... of that case held that a minor cannot be a competent party to an agreement enforceable in law under the indian contract act and that the indian partnership act provides that if all the partners agree then a minor can be admitted to the benefits of partnership but even then a minor can never be a full- fledged partner. that being the position in law, in ..... this action of the parties, it cannot be said that the minors have been made partners of the partnership as otherwise it would violate the relevant provisions of the indian partnership act and the indian contract act. for such proposition, we may refer to various decisions, namely, in the case of cit v. jagadish jakati & co. : [1979]119itr19(kar) and also in the case of cit ..... v. md. khalid faquih & co. : [1963]47itr383(bom) in which the defenition of the term partner under the income-tax act, 1922 has been dealt ..... . cit : [1973]89itr274(sc) the honble supreme court on the facts and in the context of that case had, inter alia, held that the partnership deed which was constituted was void in view of section 30 of the partnership act as one of the partners concerned, was a minor.20. in the case of cit v. kesarimal hirachand : [1971]81itr693(ap) the honble .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 09 1988 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nitro Phosphetic Fertilizer.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-09-1988

Reported in : (1988)72CTR(All)114; [1988]174ITR269(All)

..... even persons other than partners. it cannot be averred even that a person who provides finance to the firm becomes in any way a partner of the said firm. the indian partnership act also does not make it obligatory on the part of the partners to contribute capital to the firm. the same is always subject to contract between the parties. in the ..... by all or any of them acting for all. in the definition of 'partnership' under the indian partnership act, 1932, two principles always come to be recognised. the first is that there must be an agreement between persons and, secondly, the doctrine of agency between the partners inter se ..... in the present case, it is profitable to refer to certain definitions and provisions of the act. sub-section (23) of section 2 of the act reads as follows :'firm, partner and partnership have the meanings respectively assigned to them in the indian partnership act, 1932 (9 of 1932), ...'partnership is the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on ..... ]66itr613(sc) , the supreme court observed (headnote) :'a hindu undivided family is undoubtedly a person within the meaning of the indian income-tax act : it is, however, not a juristic person for all purposes, and cannot enter into an agreement of partnership with either another undivided family or individual. it is open to the manager of a joint hindu family as representing the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 21 1988 (TRI)

Collector of Central Excise Vs. Paper Packing Industries

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Apr-21-1988

Reported in : (1988)(17)ECC137

..... of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all". the section declares further that the persons who have entered into ..... , defined a "partnership" as 'the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits ..... is assessable in hands of the partnership firm as a taxable entity separate and distinct from the partners? there is first a decision under the law of partnership; thereafter, the second question arises, the question as to assessment under the tax law. it is clear, therefore, that reference must be made first to the partnership law. 11. the indian partnership act, 1932 has, by s.4 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 12 1988 (TRI)

Rajesh Corpn. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur

Decided on : Apr-12-1988

Reported in : (1988)25ITD420(JP.)

..... is not valid.13. no doubt, shri ranka, the learned counsel for the assessee, contends that the partnership has been accepted by the sales-tax authorities as the firm is registered under the indian partnership act vide registration no. 1229 as well as under central sales-tax act vide registration certificate no. aa-158/72 jpa(rst) and a-49/50/jpa/cst, but the ..... income-tax officer is within his power to satisfy himself regarding the genuineness of the firm. therefore, if the firm has been registered and the partnership deed is taken ..... genuineness of the partnership firm and its execution cannot be held as invalid by the income-tax officer and ..... allowed by the terms and conditions of the partnership deed, and, therefore, if the lady partner, smt. vimla patni has not contributed any capital share, then it is allowed by clause 4 of the partnership deed. he, further, contends that the firm is registered under the indian registration act vide registration no. 1229/79 rajasthan sales-tax act and central sales-tax. therefore, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 21 1988 (HC)

V.C. Venkata Subbaiah Chetty and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-21-1988

Reported in : (1988)74CTR(AP)60; [1988]171ITR590(AP)

..... exists and continues to carry on its business. it is true that 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 ..... to the income-tax officer. the argument thus advanced by the assessee requires the understanding of the principles incorporated in the indian partnership act, 1932. 4. under the partnership act, 1932 ('the act'), property brought by the partners or property acquired by the firm in the course of its business is in law considered ..... works co. ltd., . see what the privy council said (at page 101) : 'before the board it was argued that under the indian partnership act, 1932, a firm is recognised as an entity apart from the persons constituting it, and that the entity continues so long as the firm ..... a possesses a distinct personality does not involve that the personality continues unchanged so long as the business of he firm continues. the indian act, like the english act, avoids making a firm a corporate body enjoying the right of personal succession. the agreement of december 7, 1907, was made between ..... the indian income-tax act, 1922. the two words are defined in the income-tax act, 1961, in clause (47) of section 2. in cit v. dewas cine corporation : [1968]68itr240(sc) , a case under the 1922 act, it was explained that when a firm is dissolved, the assets of the partnership can be .....

Tag this Judgment!


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