TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Partnership Deed Validity Upheld, Real Partners Must Be Accurately Reflected</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Income-tax Versus Shantilal Vrajlal & Chandulal Dayalal & Co.</h3> The court ruled in favor of registering the partnership under the second partnership deed, dismissing technical objections raised by the Income-tax ... - Issues:1. Registration of a firm under the Income-tax Act.2. Partnership between individuals and firms.3. Profit distribution among partners.Analysis:Issue 1: Registration of a firm under the Income-tax ActThe case involved the rejection of an application for registration of a firm by the Income-tax Officer, which was later reversed by the Tribunal. The key contention was whether the partnership deed accurately reflected the composition of the partnership for the relevant year of account. The first partnership deed included two individuals and two firms as partners, leading to a technical objection to registration. However, the second partnership deed rectified this by listing the constituent members of the firms as partners. The court held that the partnership could be registered under the second deed as it corrected the infirmity of not specifying the real partners.Issue 2: Partnership between individuals and firmsThe primary argument raised was whether a partnership could exist between individuals and firms, as per the Supreme Court decision cited. While the first partnership deed included firms as partners, the court clarified that the constituent members of the firms could indeed enter into a partnership with individuals. The second partnership deed accurately reflected the real partners, addressing the technical issue raised regarding the composition of the partnership.Issue 3: Profit distribution among partnersAnother contention was regarding the distribution of profits among the partners. It was noted that the profits were recorded in the books of account under the firms' names, not the individual partners. However, the court deemed this discrepancy as a technicality, as the profits belonged to the constituent members of the firms. The court emphasized that the profits allocated to the firms could be easily computed to determine the shares of the individual partners, as outlined in the second partnership deed.In conclusion, the court ruled in favor of registering the partnership under the second partnership deed, dismissing the technical objections raised by the Income-tax Officer. The judgment clarified the legality of partnerships involving individuals and firms, emphasizing the importance of accurately reflecting the real partners in partnership deeds for registration purposes.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
