Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether cancellation of registration and withdrawal of renewal under section 186(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was justified where the original partnership deed did not specify the adult partners' shares in losses, minors were admitted only to the benefits of partnership, and the alleged supplementary deed was found not to be genuine.
Analysis: The partnership deed required an ascertainable allocation of losses among the adult partners, especially because minors admitted to the benefits of partnership could not be made liable for losses under the law governing partnership. The asserted supplementary deed, produced only after issuance of the show-cause notice, was treated as a back-dated and non-genuine document and therefore could not cure the defect in the original deed for the relevant assessment years. In such circumstances, the defect went to the root of the firm's entitlement to registration, and the authorities were justified in proceeding under section 186(1). The earlier grant of registration and renewal could not be sustained merely on the basis of a subsequently produced instrument lacking credibility.
Conclusion: The cancellation of registration and withdrawal of renewal were upheld, and the assessee-firm was not entitled to the benefit of registration for the assessment year 1973-74 and the subsequent years.