Existing partnership deed can support renewal after minors attain majority when the instrument already covers that transition.

Where a partnership deed already fixed capital contributions, profit shares and the position of minors on attaining majority, no fresh instrument was required for renewal of registration when the minors elected to become partners within the prescribed period. The court treated the transition from minor to full partner as creating no real change in the firm's constitution because the original deed, read with the Partnership Act, already covered the contingency including loss sharing after majority. The existing instrument therefore continued to evidence the firm's constitution and shares, and refusal to renew registration or to treat the firm as unregistered was unjustified.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on minors admitted to the benefits of a partnership attaining majority, a fresh instrument of partnership specifying individual shares was required for renewal of registration, and whether the firm could continue to be treated as a registered firm for the assessment years in question.

Analysis: The partnership deed fixed the capital contributions and profit shares and also provided for the position of the minors on attaining majority. The minors had elected to become partners within the prescribed period, and under the deed and the Partnership Act their status on attaining majority did not bring about any real change in the constitution of the firm. The deed was read as sufficiently covering the transition from minor to full partner, including the sharing of losses after majority, so that the existing instrument continued to evidence the constitution of the firm and its shares. The Court also distinguished the earlier view relied upon by the Commissioner and preferred the later authorities which held that no fresh deed was necessary where the original instrument already provided for the contingency.

Conclusion: No fresh instrument of partnership was required, and the refusal of renewal of registration and alteration of status to an unregistered firm were unjustified.

---