Case Details

Citation(s)
1963 SLG 3568 = 1963 SLD 3568 = 1963 PTD 307
Supreme Court of India
Civil Appeals Nos. 652 and 654 of 1957, decided on 3rd January 1961.
Presented By: J. L. Kapur, M. Hidayatullah and J. C. Shah, JJ  
Veda Vyasa (Hira Lal Dutt, A. K. Dutt and Sukumar Ghose with him) for Appellant.   R. Ganapathy Iyer and D. Gupta for
Respondent.

LADHU RAM TAPARIA  

VERSUS

  COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CENTRAL), CALCUTTA

Law:

Section:

Firm--Registration-Different firms belonging to the same group of persons-Power of Income-tax Officer to refuse regis tration and to aggregate income of all the firms-Registration as firm under Partnership Act (IX of 1932)-Firm not necessarily entitled to be registered under S. 26-A; Income-tax Act (XI of 1922).   If the Income-tax Officer finds on investigation that a number of firms carrying on business -under different firm names really belong to one and the same group of persons, he can refuse to register these firms under section 26-A of the Income-tax Act, 1922 and treat the aggregate income of all firms as the income of this group of persons.   The income-tax authorities are not bound to register a firm under section 26-A merely because the firm has been registered as such under the Partnership Act, 1932. JUDGMENT   SHAH, J.-These are four appeals with special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution. Two of these appeals, Civil Appeals Nos. 652 of 1957 and 654 of 1957 are against the order of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta declining to call for a statement of the case from the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Calcutta, under section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act. The remaining two, Civil Appeals Nos. 651 of 1957 and 653 of 1957, are against the orders of the income-tax Appellate Tribunal holding that, the: four firms, firm "Ladhuram Taparia", "Jagannath Haumanbux", "Jagannath Harnarain" and "Ganpatrai Jorawarmall" belonged to the same group of persons, viz., Ladhuram Taparia and Ganpatrai Taparia and their respective sons, and that the income earned in the business in cloth and yarn carried on in those names was liable to be amalgamated for purposes of assessment in the hands of the appellant firm and refusing to renew registration of these firms under section 26-A of the Income-tax Act.   There was originally a firm carrying on business in cloth and yarn in the name and style of "Jagannath Jewanmal" at 37, Armenian Street, Calcutta. Of this firm, Ladhuram, Ganpatrai and their brothers and several outsiders were partners. On account of disputes between the partners, this firm…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register