| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1973 SLG 478 1973 SLD 478 (1973) 87 ITR 57 |
Madras High Court
TAX CASE No. 311 OF 1966 (REFERENCE No. 76 OF 1966) APRIL 14, 1972
G. RAMANUJAM AND V. RA MASWAMI, JJ.
K. Srinivasan and K.C. Rajappa for the Applicant. V. Balasubramanyan and J. Jayaraman for the
Respondent.
TAX CASE No. 311 OF 1966 (REFERENCE No. 76 OF 1966) APRIL 14, 1972
G. RAMANUJAM AND V. RA MASWAMI, JJ.
K. Srinivasan and K.C. Rajappa for the Applicant. V. Balasubramanyan and J. Jayaraman for the
Respondent.
A. Asha & Co.
v.
Commissioner of IncomE tax
Law:
Section:
Section 184 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 26A of Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Firm - Position prior to - Assessment year 1961-62 - Partnership deed was executed between firm 'A' consisting of three partners and another person - Individual shares of three partners of firm A had not been specifically stated in instrument of partnership - Application for registration, however, stated that share of firm A in assessee firm would be distributed among its partners in ratio mentioned in partnership deed of firm A which was filed alongwith application - Whether on facts firm was entitled to registration - Held, yes FACTS The partnership deed of the assessee-firm was executed between the firm 'a' consisting of three partners and another person 'M'. The firm was entitled to a share of 75 paise and 'M' to a share of 25 paise in the partnership. In the application for registration made under section 26A of the 1922 Act, and the Rules framed thereunder in the column relating to the share of profits in the Schedule, the combined share of he three individual partners constituting the firm A was given as 75 paise, but with a note that it had to be credited and distributed between the partners of the firm 'A' in the ratio mentioned in the deed of partnership of that firm. The assessee filed the application under section 26A for registration of the firm for the assessment year 1961-62 along with the deed of partnership of the assessee-firm and also the partnership deed, of the firm A. The ITO refused to register the same on the ground that the individuals shares of the three partners of the firm A had not been specifically stated in the instrument of partnership. The AAC and the Tribunal upheld the order of the ITO. On reference : HELD It was not in dispute that the partnership deed of the firm 'A' and the assessee-firm was a genuine partnership and if one were to refer to the partnership deed of the firm A, or the books of that firm one could easily ascertain the individual shares of the three members who constituted the firm A. An instrument of partnership may be constituted by one or several documents and what section 26A requires is that the documents…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492