Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        1979 (8) TMI 58 - HC - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Court affirms separate tax assessment for related entities based on distinct businesses and finances The court held that M/s. G. Parthasarathy Naidu & Sons and M/s. Sri Lakshmi Oil and Flour Mills are separate legal entities for assessment under the ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Court affirms separate tax assessment for related entities based on distinct businesses and finances

                          The court held that M/s. G. Parthasarathy Naidu & Sons and M/s. Sri Lakshmi Oil and Flour Mills are separate legal entities for assessment under the Income-tax Act. The firms were deemed distinct due to different businesses, profit-sharing ratios, and no inter-mixing of funds. The decision favored the assessee, affirming the firms' status as separate and distinct assessable entities.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Whether M/s. G. Parthasarathy Naidu and Sons and M/s. Sri Lakshmi Oil and Flour Mills can be treated as two separate firms and distinct assessable entities.

                          Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

                          Issue 1: Whether M/s. G. Parthasarathy Naidu and Sons and M/s. Sri Lakshmi Oil and Flour Mills can be treated as two separate firms and distinct assessable entities.

                          Facts:
                          - G. Parthasarathy Naidu, the karta of the HUF, and his three sons formed a sub-partnership sharing a 5/16th partnership share in M/s. Gadireddi Peda Narasimhulu Naidu & Sons.
                          - The assessee-firm was constituted on October 1, 1968, with profits shared equally among the three major partners and losses shared equally.
                          - Another partnership, M/s. Sri Lakshmi Oil and Flour Mills, was formed on November 26, 1968, by the same divided coparceners for the oil business, with a different loss-sharing ratio.
                          - For the assessment year 1971-72, separate returns were filed for both firms, but the ITO clubbed the income of the two firms and assessed them as one entity.

                          Arguments:
                          - The revenue argued that since the firms consisted of the same partners, they should be considered one entity for tax purposes, citing the decision in Addl. CIT v. Venkata Narasimha Rao & Co. [1976] 104 ITR 28.
                          - The assessee contended that the two firms were separate entities with different businesses and profit-sharing ratios, and there was no inter-lacing or inter-mixing of funds between them.

                          Legal Analysis:
                          - The court examined whether a firm under the Income-tax Act (I.T. Act) is a separate and independent juristic personality.
                          - Under the I.T. Act, a firm is a distinct legal entity chargeable to income-tax, unlike under the Partnership Act where it is merely an association of persons.
                          - The court referenced multiple precedents, including CIT v. A. W. Figgies and Company [1953] 24 ITR 405 and Dulichand Laxminarayan v. CIT [1956] 29 ITR 535, which established that a firm is a separate assessable entity under the I.T. Act.
                          - The court disagreed with the Division Bench decision in Addl. CIT v. Venkata Narasimha Rao & Co., which held that a firm does not assume a legal personality under the I.T. Act.
                          - The court emphasized that under the I.T. Act, there is no prohibition against the existence of two or more separate firms by the same partners.

                          Conclusion:
                          - The court concluded that the two firms, M/s. G. Parthasarathy Naidu & Sons and M/s. Sri Lakshmi Oil and Flour Mills, are separate legal entities for the purpose of assessment under the I.T. Act.
                          - The Tribunal's finding that there was no inter-lacing or inter-mixing between the two firms and that they had different businesses and profit-sharing ratios was upheld.
                          - The court answered the question in the affirmative, in favor of the assessee, holding that the two firms can be treated as separate and distinct assessable entities.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found