| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1981 SLG 1884 1981 SLD 1884 (1981) 131 ITR 492 |
Allahabad High Court
IT REFERENCE No. 730 OF 1976 JULY 7, 1980
C.S.P. SINGH AND R.R. RASTOGI, JJ.
R.K. Gulati and A. Gupta for the Applicant. K.B. Bhatnagar for the
Respondent
IT REFERENCE No. 730 OF 1976 JULY 7, 1980
C.S.P. SINGH AND R.R. RASTOGI, JJ.
R.K. Gulati and A. Gupta for the Applicant. K.B. Bhatnagar for the
Respondent
Commissioner of IncomE tax
v.
Gupta Bros.
Law:
Section:
Section 185 of the Income-tax act, 1961 - Firm - Registration - Validity of partnership - Assessee-firm originally consisted of two partners, M and L, on behalf of their respective HUF - P, a junior member of M's HUF, taken into firm as working partner without any contribution from P - ITO and AAC refused grant of registration - Tribunal reversed AAC's order, holding that impugned partnership was valid as p was a working partner - Whether tribunal was right - Held, yes Facts The assessee-firm originally consisted of two partners, M and L, as respective kartas of their HUFs and had 50 per cent shares each. On 1-4-1972, P, a junior member of M's HUF, joined the firm as a working partner. P did not contribute any cash or other assets of his own for investment in the firm. The new profit ratios were determined at 40 per cent each for M and L and 20 per cent for P. The ITO rejected the assessee's application for registration under section 185 for the assessment year 1973-74. On appeal, the AAC sustained the ITO's order on the ground that P could not become a partner in the firm in which his HUF was already a partner through its karta as this would amount to an agreement of partnership by P with himself. The Tribunal, on second appeal, reversed the AAC's order observing (i) that P had been taken as a working partner, and as such, the partnership was valid ; and (ii) that there was no merit in revenue's contention that if the karta of HUF was a partner of the firm in a representative capacity and if junior member did not bring separate property into partnership assets, it would amount to creating a partnership inter se which would cut at root of a joint undivided family. On reference : Held Partnership is a relation arising out of a contract between persons to share the profits of a business. Being a contract, it must be founded on some consideration so that it should be binding. It is not necessary that the consideration should be cash or, property in order that a binding contract comes into existence. It may take the shape of capital, but it may also take the shape of labour and skill which a working partner puts. Hence, the Tribunal was right in holding that as Pā¦
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