Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act 1932 section 58 application for registration Page 1 of about 15,234 results (0.325 seconds)

Radha Krishna Jalan Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Guwahati

..... sub-partnerships have been recognized in india and registration accorded under the indian it act, 1922, though sub-partnership has not been defined either in the indian partnership act, 1932 or in the it act, 1961. ..... but the tribunal failed to notice that the judgment in dulichand laxminarayan (supra) was rendered in the context of rule 2 of the indian it rules, 1922, which required that all the partners of a firm must sign the application for registration. ..... the tribunal was of the view that section 10(2a) is applicable only in case of a partner of the firm and the appellant firm not being a partner of m/s rock international cannot get the exemption under section 10(2a). ..... this anomalous and illogical consequence has arisen because of refusal to consider m/s radha krishna jalan, the appellant firm, as a partner of the main partnership firm m/s rock international for the limited purpose of section 10(2a) of the it act, 1961. ..... the contention of the revenue that the appellant firm not being a partner of the main partnership will not be entitled to the benefit of section 10(2a) is not accepted for the reason that it is totally in disharmony with the scheme of the act.28. ..... the legal fiction created for non-application of the provisions of section 10(2a) on the ground that the appellant firm is not a partner of the main partnership has ushered in an absurd situation contrary to the facts as well as the provisions of the act. .....

Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. A. Abdul Rahim and Co.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1965SC1703; [1965]55ITR651(SC); [1965]2SCR13

..... , the partnership is not a genuine one; (2) even if abdul rehman kalubhai is a benamidar of abdul rahim valibhai in respect of the 2 annas share in the partnership, abdul rahim valibhai has in fact 9 annas share in the partnership; as the partnership deed shows that he has only 7 annas share instead of 9 annas share, there is no correct specification of his individual share within the meaning of section 26a of the act and, therefore, the income-tax officer rightly rejected the firm's application for registration under section 26a of the act. 6. ..... on may 8, 1956, the said firm presented an application to the income-tax officer for its registration under section 2 'whether a partnership in which one partner is the benamidar of another partner could be registered under section 26a of the indian income-tax act ?' 3. ..... under section 26b of the act, 'firm', 'partner' and 'partnership' have the same meanings respectively as in the indian partnership act, 1932 (ix of 1932) : provide that the expression 'partner' includes any person who being a minor has been admitted to the benefits of partnership. .....

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bhaichand Textile Mills

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1986)51CTR(Bom)38; [1986]161ITR129(Bom); [1986]25TAXMAN15(Bom)

..... (the provisions of section 26a of the 1922 act are substantial]y similar to those of section 184 of the income-tax act, l961, in that an application for registration can be made on behalf of any firm constituted under a deed of partnership specifying the individual shares of the partners. ..... it was contended on behalf of the revenue that there being no specification of the partners' shares in respect of losses in the partnership deed, the defect was fatal to the claim for registration. ..... ) on behalf of the assessee, the provision of section 13(b) of the indian partnership act, 1932, were brought to the notice of the supreme court. ..... this court noted that though the provisions of section 184 of the income-tax act, 1961, had made certain changes as compared to the provisions of section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922, the substantial requirement that there must be a deed of partnership and the individual shares of the partners must be specified therein remained the same. ..... the assessee applied for registration under the provisions of the income-tax act, 1961. ..... been taken in imdadali tayaba's case [1972] tax lr 655, the supreme court had clearly pointed out that the absence of specification of the shares in which losses were to be apportioned by the partners was an important consideration for determining whether a partnership met the requirement of registration under section 184.9. .....

N. Marappan and Another Vs. V.S.T. Sengottaian and Others

Court : Chennai

..... a conjoint reading of sections 58 and 69 will show that registration of the partnership deed under the provisions of the registration act will not amount to registration of the firm under section 58 of the indian partnership act, 1932. ..... abdullah reported in air 1970 mad 3 (fb) become redundant, wherein it was held that without an instrument whether it would be a deed of dissolution of partnership if it involved partition by virtue of section 6 it would attract higher stamp duty applicable for partition under article 45. ..... application for registration. ..... though cause of action for filing such a suit for declaration regarding the validity of ex.a4-partnership dissolution deed might have arisen prior to the dismissal of the execution application, there cannot be any contrary view that at least on the dismissal of the execution application (claim petition), cause of action for seeking declaration regarding the validity of ex.a4-partnership dissolution deed had arisen. ..... pw1 has admitted in clear terms that their claim application in e.a.no.810/1988 was dismissed by the executing court and that thereafter they paid the entire decree amount for which execution was levied and saved the property from court auction sale. ..... as the suit for declaration has been filed beyond three years from the date of dismissal of the claim application, the suit is barred under article 58 of the limitation act, 1963. .....

Vilas Shriram Mahalle and anr. Vs. Rajdhaniprasad Rahinprasad Tiwari a ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2005(3)ALLMR478; 2005(4)BomCR869; 2005(1)MhLj596

..... after the suit was filed.realising that the defect arising as a result of the non-registration of the firm on the date on which the suit was filed may lead to a dismissal of the suit in view of the provisions of section 69 of the act as amended by the indian partnership (maharashtra amendment) act, 1984 which inserted section 69-a in the said act, the plaintiff filed the said application for permission to withdraw the suit with leave to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action. ..... the application for registration was made on 31st august, 1997. ..... an application for registration thereof was duly made with the registrar of firms. ..... the supreme court held that the suit was not barred by section 69(2) of partnership act, 1932. ..... in other words, a partner of an erstwhile unregistered partnership firm cannot bring a suit to enforce a right arising out of a contract falling within the ambit of section 69 of the partnership act. ..... the suit was not maintainable in view of the provisions of section 69(2) of the partnership act. ..... admittedly, when the suit was filed the firm was not registered under section 59 of the indian partnership act, 1932 (hereinafter referred to as the said act). .....

K.D. Kamath and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : [1971]82ITR680(SC); (1971)2SCC873; [1972]1SCR1034

..... for the assessment year 1959-60, corresponding to the previous year ending march 31, 1959, the appellant filed an application to the income-tax officer, 'a' ward, dharawar under section 26a for registration of the partnership in the name of m/s. k.d. ..... to be: (1) that there should be an agreement to share the profits and losses of 'the business and (2) that each of the partners should be acting as agent of all, though, these two conditions, by and large, have to be satisfied when the relationship of partners is created between the parties, we would emphasis that the legal requirements under section 4 of the partnership act to constitute a partnership in law are: (1) there must be an agreement to share the profits or losses of the business; and (2) the business must be carried ..... the partnership was registered under the indian partnership act, 1932, (hereinafter to be referred as the partnership act) on or about august 11, 1959. ..... a is an instrument of partnership on the basis of which the appellant firm is eligible to be granted registration under section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (hereinafter to be referred as the income-tax act).2. ..... sub-section (2) clearly provides that notwithstanding anything contained in section 27 of the indian contract act, the contract between the partners may provide that a partner shall not carry on any business other than that of the firm while he is a partner. .....

Modern Stores Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : (1985)48CTR(AP)8; [1986]157ITR589(AP)

..... it appears, he exercised the option under section 30(5) of the indian partnership act, 1932, to become a partner in the firm ..... the assessee made an application for registration of the firm evidenced by the deed of partnership dated december 19, 1974, for the income-tax assessment year ..... for the reasons aforesaid, we hold that the assessee-firm evidenced by the deed of partnership dated december 19, 1974, is bound to be registered under section 185 of the income-tax act, 1961, and the tribunal was in error in rejecting the assessee's claim for registration ..... the assessee's claim for registration was rejected by the income-tax officer on the following grounds : (i) there was no operative deed from april 1, 1974, to october 30, 1974; (ii) the agreement dated december 19, 1974, could not have retrospective effect with effect from april 1, 1974; and (iii) if the partnership deed dated december 19, 1974, is given effect to from april 1, 1974, prabhakar gupta, who was a minor till october 30, 1974, would be obliged to share ..... is also no allegation that the assessee did not comply with the rules relating to the grant of registration, that is to say, filing an application in the prescribed form within time and in the manner prescribed. ..... , the deed of partnership dated december 19, 1974, was executed during the accounting year relevant to the assessment year under consideration and the assessee asked for the registration of the firm evidenced by the deed of partnership dated december 19, 1974 .....

Popatlal Vadilal Bhansali Vs. Kasturbhai Ranchhodbhai Soni

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (2003)3GLR2595

..... as per the provisions of section 68 of the indian partnership act, 1932, any statement, intimation or notice recorded or noted in the register of firms, shall be authenticated (iii) the third type of document shown by the learned counsel for the petitioners is the certificate under gujarat professional business trade and employment rules, 1976 which is at exh. 45. ..... the application was moved on 7.6.1990 for registration of the firm for the purpose of sales tax by all the partners giving out the share of all the partners. ..... (iv) a copy of the application dated 7.6.1990 for registration of firms for the purpose of sales tax by all the partners, wherein the shares of the partners have been defined. ..... to prove the fact that the property has not been sub-let to any person, the defendant no.1 relied on the partnership deed, registration of partnership firm, certificate of professional tax, certificate of shops and establishment act to show that the shop is in possession of parth jewellers. ..... the next question which arises for consideration of this court is as to whether this court has jurisdiction to entertain this revision application under section 29(2) of the bombay rent act to correct the findings recorded by the courts below. ..... where, therefore, an application for eviction of tenant from a shop was based on the allegation that the premises had been sub-let to a trading company, this allegation had to be proved as a fact by the landlord and merely on the basis of the photograph .....

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nirmal Kumar and Co.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : [1991]188ITR631(MP)

..... in the light of the proviso to sub-section (5) and the provisions of sub-section (7) of section 30 of the indian partnership act, 1932, and those of section 185(3) of the act, the tribunal came to the conclusion that the assessee was entitled to the continuation of registration of the firm. ..... being aggrieved, the revenue applied for a reference under section 256(1) of the act which was rejected, the revenue has, therefore, preferred this application under section 256(2) of the act for requiring the tribunal to state the case and to make a reference as aforesaid.3. ..... 12 filed by it in the light of the provision of section 185(3) of the act by holding that the income-tax officer was not justified in rejecting the claim of the assessee for continuation of registration merely on the ground that one of the major partners did not sign the declaration in form no. 12. ..... by this application under section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961 (in short, the 'act'), the revenue has applied to this court for requiring the appellate tribunal to state the case and to refer it for the opinion of this court on the following two proposed questions of law :'1. ..... the application for reference was, therefore, rightly rejected.4. ..... for the foregoing reasons, this application under section 256(2) of the act fails and it is hereby dismissed. .....

Raj Construction Co. Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : (1985)49CTR(Raj)348; [1986]157ITR734(Raj)

..... in the case was that the income-tax officer before allowing the application for registration under section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922, must be in a position to ascertain the shares of the partners in the losses even if section 26a did not require the shares in the losses to be specified in the instrument of partnership. ..... , the appellate tribunal held that therequirements of section 26a of the act were satisfied, inasmuch as the partnership deed could be reasonably construed as clearly implying that the shares of the partners of each group were equal ; that all the eight partners had signed the application for registration ; that the department had already ascertained the individual shares of the eight partners and assessed them accordingly construing the partnership deed in the same manner. ..... application for registration of the firm under section 26a of the act was rejected by the income-tax officer on the ground that the share of each partner of the various groups were not specifically mentioned in the partnership ..... , and it cannot be, disputed that the income-tax officer before allowing the application for registration must be in a position to ascertain the shares of the partners in the losses even if section 26a did not require the shares in the losses to be specified in the instrument of partnership.'16. ..... of course, a clause providing that the partnership was according to the stipulations in the deed and according to the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932. .....