Case Details

Citation(s)
1976 SLG 191 1976 SLD 191 (1976) 102 ITR 748
Calcutta High Court
IT REFERENCE No. 123 OF 1971, JANUARY 27, 1975
SABYASACHI MUKHARJI AND R.N. PYNE, JJ.
S.N. Dutta for the Applicant. B.L. Pal and Ajay Mitra for the
Respondent

Narayan Prasad Vijaivargiya

v.

Commissioner of IncomE tax

Law:

Section:

Sections 182 to 186 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with section 30 of the Partnership Act, 1932 - Firm - Position prior to 1-4-1993 - Assessment year 1962-63 - ITO refused registration of assessee firm which was constituted by six major persons and seventh a minor on ground that minors had been shown as full fledged partners - Partnership deed in question stated that term "partner" would include minor given benefit of partnership and that parties of first to sixth parts had agreed to give party of seventh part benefit of partnership - Whether partnership deed could not be said to go beyond provisions of section 30 and therefore, could not be regarded as invalid - Held, yes - Whether therefore, refusal of registration could not be upheld - Held, yes FACTS The assessee-firm originally consisting of seven parties was constituted under the deed of partnership dated 17-5-1957. One partner died on 5-10-1959, and another deed of partnership was executed on 9-11-1959, which took effect from 6-10-1959. For the assessment year 1962-63, the ITO refused registration to the assessee on two grounds: firstly, that no application for registration had been filed and, secondly, that the minors had been shown as full-fledged partners. The appellate authorities upheld the order of the ITO denying registration to the assessee. HELD In the deed of partnership dated 9-11-1959, two things needed to be noticed: (i) after the name of the 6 parties it was stated that "the term 'partner' includes a minor given the benefits of partnership", and (ii ) in the recital it was stated that parties of the first to the sixth parts had agreed to give the party of the seventh part the benefits of the partnership. Now, the question was whether the rest of the deed must be coloured by or read in the light of the said two provisions or only the provision (ii) stated above. A deed is to be read and construed as a whole and, if possible, effect should be given to all parts thereof. In other words, the general intention is to be collected from the instrument as a whole and that intention should be inferred from the general form of the deed. This would be more so when a deed is to be construed…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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