Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Cochin
Decided on : Dec-18-1991
Reported in : (1992)40ITD507(Coch.)
..... fact, the hon'ble high court of kerala in paulson constructions v. cit [ 1990] 181 itr476, held as per head notes as follows: section 47 of the indian partnership act, 1932, says that on the dissolution of a firm, the authority of each partner to bind the firm, and the other mutual rights and obligation of the partners, continue ..... belonging to the fine.the deed is silent, about the ownership of the property by the partnership firm. under the provisions of the partnership act, a partner can certainly assign his interest in the partnership property, though such interest cannot be predicated during the subsistence of the partnership. the sale deed executed by shri kaladharan having specified she share individually in the properties of ..... for that reason, the less effectual in putting an end to his liability--jefferys v. smith  27 rr 49.no doubt, the indian courts have held that upon assignment or transfer of interest by a partner, the partnership does not come to an end. but such a proposition can be advanced only when there are more than two partners and one ..... the partnership firm, it cannot be said that shri kaladharan has in law conveyed his interest in the partnership property. the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Aug-08-1991
..... law point involved is the same, that is the interpretation of section 2(23) and section 64(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, for short the 'act', and section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932.3. income-tax reference no. 13 of 1985 relates to the assessment year 1978-79, income-tax reference no. 3 ..... section 64 of the income-tax act, 1961, the assessee-individual was not the partner of the firm and whether the share of profits arising in the hands ..... on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a proper construction of section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, section 2(23) and section 64(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, the tribunal was justified in dismissing the departmental appeals impliedly holding the view that the share of profits from ..... application under section 256(2) of the act. by the said application the following question was sought to be referred to this court (at p. 420):'whether, on the fads and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper construction of section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, section 2(23) and ..... of the tribunal. thus we find that no specific law was laid down regarding section 64 of the act regarding' the question as to whether the income of the wife/minor child from a partnership firm can be included in assessing the income of a person who was also a partner of the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Decided on : Aug-19-1991
Reported in : (1991)39ITD21(Ahd.)
..... not material. what is material is the nature of activity of the firm. under section 2(23) of the it act the words "firm", "partner" and "partnership" have the meanings respectively assigned to them in the indian partnership act, 1932.section 4 of the said act defines expression "partnership" as a relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all ..... or any of them acting for all. the definition in the partnership act indicates that what all that was necessary was that the business should be carried on ..... such activity could be termed as business activity, the firm could be regarded to be carrying on business and such a firm would be valid both under the partnership act, 1932 and under the it act, 1961. in the present case the activity for which the assessee firm has been constituted would amount to business activity and as such the assessee-firm was valid ..... . it was immaterial as to under what head the particular income in a particular year was assessable under the it act. what is necessary to be seen is whether the entire .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Sep-20-1991
Reported in : 202ITR869(Guj)
..... would stand on the same footing as any other partner and cannot charge the co-partners with any sum in shape of salary or commission. (see indian partnership act by pollock and mulla, fifth edition, at page 47). it appears to us that section 40(b), on its plain reading, does not envisage ..... person who is a partner were to fall outside the scope of the above provision. 8. the provisions of section 12 and 13 of the indian partnership act which deal with relations of partners to one another, inter alia, provide that subject to contract between the partners, each partner is bound to ..... disallowed and that they permissible deductions in computing the income of the firm. the high court, after referring to the relevant provision of the partnership act, held that every partner is bound to attend diligently to his duties in the conduct of the business and is not entitled to receive remuneration ..... of any expenditure incurred by the firm for doing its work through persons other than partners. the partnership acts through its partners and, therefore, when partners get work done of the partnership firm or for the partnership firm, the expenditure which is deductible ought to be deducted and it is only the real ..... obliged to do under the terms of the contract of the statutory provisions, is the work which is in effect done by the partnership firm itself, the partner acting as its agent. therefore, whatever expenditure is incurred by the partner in respect of such work done for the firm, cannot be .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras
Decided on : Apr-15-1991
Reported in : (1991)38ITD289(Mad.)
..... auspicious day in the month of chithirai. the net profit or loss shall be divided between us equally. (11) in respect of matters not provided herein, the provisions of the indian partnership act shall apply.18. as pointed out earlier, no deed of retirement was drawn up when the deceased retired from the firm on 16-4-1981. on may 20,1981 the ..... partner, namely the said deceased.15. we may at the outset notice certain well settled principles having a direct bearing on this issue. these are : - (i) section 14 of the partnership act, 1932 expressly declares that the goodwill is an asset of the firm. this is of course subject to contract to the contrary between the partners. (ii) a partner of a ..... points readily suggest themselves. the deed dated june 18,1962 is absolutely silent on the question of goodwill. therefore, under the partnership act as also pursuant to the clear provisions of clause 11 of the deed, the provisions of the said act will have to be applied. this would mean that goodwill was the asset of the firm and that the right of ..... continue notwithstanding the death of a partner. this is because in the absence of a specific term in the deed of partnership to that effect, the partnership act does not operate to extinguish the proprietary right of a partner in the assets of the firm (including goodwill). this is because, as pointed out by the supreme court in .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-02-1991
Reported in : AIR1993Delhi76; 1991(2)ARBLR409(Delhi); 1991(21)DRJ322
..... registered partners. in view of this affidavit which is not controverter, counsel for the respondent has not raised any contentions based on provisions of section 69 of the indian partnership act. so, this issue is decided in favor of the petitioner. (7) issues nos. 2&3 issues nos. 2 & 3 would be dealt with together. ..... period. (3) the respondents has contested the petition pleading that the petition is not maintainable as is hit by the provisions of section 69 of the indian partnership act and on merits, it is pleaded that in view of the terms of the contract, particularly clauses 66.1.0 and clause 22.214.171.124. ..... , is not entitled to raise any other claim which could be referred to arbitration. (5) following issues were framed: 1.is the petitioner a registered partnership firm and is 'the name of shri mahavir prasad bansal entered in the register of registrar of firms as a partner thereof? 2.whether the claims of ..... claim alleging that there had occurred a breach of contract by the indian oil corporation in furnishing the drawings. the contractor in that case is alleged to have suffered damages for idle labour and due to escalation of prices of ..... on january 8, 1985, by d.p. wadhwa, j. and the other given in suit no. 2399-a/85, m/s associated hybilds (p) ltd. vs indian oil corporation limited, decided on october 15, 1987, by b.n. kirpal, j.. in the case of uttam singh duggal (supra) the contractor has put up the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-12-1991
Reported in : (1991)1MLJ421
..... per the certificate produced in this court, the actual registration was made and as mentioned in form-a which is maintained under section 59 of the indian partnership act, 1932, only on 16.2.1987. learned counsel for the plaintiff produced a zerox copy of the firm's registration certificate signed by the registrar ..... the suit filed by the appellant on the question of maintainability in view of the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 69 of the partnership act by confirming the view taken by the trial court and the high court. the supreme court further held that though the plaint was amended on a ..... is not complied.the registration of the firm is a condition precedent to its right to institute a suit of the nature mentioned in section 69(2), partnership act. the registration after the institution of the suit cannot cure the defect of non-registration before the date of suit.in loon karan v. ivan e. ..... the petition is dismissed.learned judge was of the view that though a fresh suit to be filed after the firm is registered under the partnership act may not be a formal defect, learned judge permitted the parties to file a fresh suit. according to the learned judge even if the suit ..... contention cited a decision in arunagiri mudaliar in re. : air1936mad697 . the above suit was filed by the partners who have not been registered under the partnership act. learned judge held that subsequent suit filed by them after such registration, was not barred under order 23, rule 1(3), c.p.c. learned .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-02-1991
Reported in : (1992)41ITD23(Mum.)
..... also. it follows that under the income-tax act, a firm is treated as a distinct and separate entity, different from the partners constituting it ..... description of the partners carrying on the business. but for taxing purposes 'a partnership firm' is treated as an entirely distinct, from the persons who constitute the 'firm'. section 2(23) gives the same meaning to the expressions "firm", "partner" and "partnership" as are respectively assigned to them in the indian partnership act, 1932. section 2(31) lays down that a "person" includes a firm ..... .13. where a firm is dissolved either by operation of law or by act of parties and is succeeded ..... assessment years 1977-78,1978-79 and 1979-80. for the sake of convenience, these are consolidated together and disposed of by a common order.2. the assessee is a partnership firm comprising of two partners, viz., shri r.k. mody and miss m.k. mody having equal shares (hereinafter called the "new firm").3. shri r.k. mody and miss .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Nov-29-1991
Reported in : (1993)45TTJ(All)87
..... and that such erroneous action was correctly rectified by the learned dy. commr. (a). our attention was also invited to s. 4 of the indian partnership act for the purpose that the conditions picked up by the learned ito for refusing registration were not there in the provision. according to him any interference ..... conditions are to be satisfied in order that a firm may be entitled to registration : (i) the firm should be constituted under an instrument of partnership specifying the individual shares of the partners; (ii) an application on behalf of and signed by all partners and containing all the particulars as set out ..... the learned ito had not found that any partner was benamidar of other. it was explained that in the assessees case, there was a duly executed partnership deed, profit & losses were being shared and the business was being carried on on behalf of the partners. it was pointed out that since these ..... 880. assessment was framed on 28th march, 1988, on total income of rs. 50,630 under s. 143(3) of the it act, 1961.4. in the present case, a deed of partnership was drawn on 15th march, 1984, between raj kumar agarwal as karta of his huf, smt. rita kumari and km. smita ..... the terms and conditions of the instrument of partnership in the accounting year. once such conditions are satisfied, it is the obligation of the ito under the act to extend the benefit of registration and allow the firm to enjoy the benefits provided by the act'.15. in the light of our preceding discussions .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on : Nov-29-1991
Reported in : (1992)43ITD45(All.)
..... deny registration and that such erroneous action was correctly rectified by the 1d. dc (a). our attention was also invited to section 4 of the indian partnership act for the purpose that the conditions picked up by the 1d. ito for refusing registration were not there in the provision.according to him any interference ..... following conditions are to be satisfied in order that a firm may be entitled to registration: (i) the firm should be constituted under an instrument of partnership specifying the individual shares of the partners; (ii) an application on behalf of and signed by all partners and containing all the particulars as set out ..... ito had not found that any partner was benamidar of other. it was explained that in the assessee's case, there was a duly executed partnership deed, profit and losses were being shared and the business was being carried on on behalf of the partners. it was pointed out that since these ..... was framed on 28-3-1988, on total income of rs. 50,630 under section 143(3) of the income-tax act, 1961.4. in the present case, a deed of partnership was drawn on 15-3-1984, between raj kumar agarwal as karta of his huf, smt. rita kumari and km.smita arora ..... the terms and conditions of the instrument of partnership in the accounting year. once such conditions are satisfied, it is the obligation of the ito under the act to extend the benefit of registration and allow the firm to enjoy the benefits provided by the act.15. in the light of our preceding discussions .....Tag this Judgment!