Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1997)63ITD195(Mum.)
..... we set aside the decision of the allahabad high court and also of the tribunal and answer the question formulated by the revenue under section 256(1) of the act in the negative, in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.14.15 we may once again reproduce the observations of the madras high court (supra) where the distinction between the provisions of development rebate and investment allowance on the concept of the owner of the machinery, use of the machinery by the owner thereof for the business, the machinery being installed at a place other than that of the premises of the owner and used for ..... manufacturing article or thing were clearly brought out - in other words, while the ..... under the indian partnership act, 1932, the partnership firm registered thereunder is neither a person nor a legal entity. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1997)60ITD662(Mum.)
..... hills [1932] 16 tax case 430, 447, it was held : "the cardinal requirement is that all the contributors to the common funds must be entitled to participate in the surplus and that all the participators in the surplus must be contributors to the common fund, in other words, there must be complete identity between the contributors and the participators." 6. ..... [1993] 202 itr 198/71 taxman 351 has held : "the cardinal principle to apply the test of mutuality is that all the contributors to the common fund must be entitled to participate in the surplus and that all the participators in the surplus must be contributors to the common fund. ..... moreover, the receipt of this amount by the society, could never be considered as akin to a windfall because the receipt of the amount by the society was in the terms of the contract which had been entered into by the society with its members. ..... briefly the facts : the assessee is a co-operative housing society.it is registered under section 10 of the bombay co-operative societies act, 1925. ..... aiyer's judicial dictionary at page 651, 'mutuality' is defined as reciprocity of obligations, the state of things in which one person, being bound to perform some act, for the benefit of another, that other on his side is bound to do something for the benefit of the former.8. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1995)52ITD640(Mum.)
..... partnership is defined in the partnership act, 1932, as relationship between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any one of them acting for all. ..... by agreeing to purchase land, a person cannot be said in law to hold that land....coming to the facts of the present case, it was stated that there is nothing in the agreement nor can it be implied from the circumstances that it was the object of the parties that the provisions of the act relating to the ceiling should be transgressed. ..... in clause 6, it is laid down that the business of the partnership shall continue to be carried on the business of quarrying, contractors, constructions, dealing in all types of materials, traders, stockists, import, export of all the commodities and /or to act as agents, to act as representatives of manufacturers and to do such other business which the partners may mutually agree upon from time to time. ..... it was submitted by shri harish that the assessee had acquired certain rights including the right to obtain conveyance, subject to the proceedings under various laws and these rights were confirmed and acted upon by the bmrda and other authorities. ..... adverting to the provisions of section 19 of the bombay rent (control) act, it was stated that if a person surrenders his tenancy rights for a consideration - both the giver and the taker are liable to be prosecuted and the term of imprisonment could be as much as two years. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1991)37ITD1(Mum.)
..... justifying the stand of the assessee that the partners have agreed to divide the balance profit 95% at a later date for various reasons, the reasons given are : - the stand of the assessee is that the assessee meets the requirements of law in terms of the definitions in the income-tax act, 1961 and the indian partnership act, 1932 vis-a-vis the definitions of 'firm', 'partners' and 'partnership'. ..... a part of the uncertainty in determining the relationship could be due to lack of precision in the language to express and in that case it will be subject to the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932 but when the uncertainty is in terms of clear expression, then the replationship cannot be termed as partnership. ..... , the shares are not specified but left to imagination, hence it cannot be said on those facts that there was a firm or a partnership in the eyes of law as stood defined in the indian partnership act, 1932 and for income-tax purposes.to the same effect is the decision of the punjab high court (as it then was). ..... under section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, 'partnership' is the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all. .....
Tag this Judgment!