Partnership deed and registration: tax cannot look behind the instrument to test beneficial ownership or representative capacity.

A partnership deed naming the partners in their individual capacity was not unlawful merely because some partners may have acted for Hindu undivided families, since a Hindu undivided family is not itself a juristic person capable of becoming a partner and the firm is treated as one between the karta and the other partners. For registration under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the Income-tax Officer must confine the enquiry to the partnership deed and statutory requirements; he cannot go behind the instrument to investigate beneficial or representative ownership. Where the deed showed a genuine partnership with specified shares and legal validity, registration was available.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a partnership shown in the deed as consisting of individual partners could be treated as unlawful on the footing that some partners were representatives of Hindu undivided families, thereby attracting the bar under section 4 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913. (ii) Whether, for registration under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the Income-tax Officer could go behind the partnership deed and investigate the beneficial or representative capacity of the persons named as partners.

Issue (i): Whether a partnership shown in the deed as consisting of individual partners could be treated as unlawful on the footing that some partners were representatives of Hindu undivided families, thereby attracting the bar under section 4 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913.

Analysis: Only persons competent to contract can enter into partnership under the Partnership Act. A Hindu undivided family, as such, is not a juristic person capable of becoming a partner; where a karta joins a firm, the partnership is between the karta in his individual legal capacity and the other partners, and the family does not become a partner ipso facto. The statutory assumption that a joint family may be counted as a partner was rejected as unsound. On the face of the deed, the partners appeared to have joined in their own right, and nothing in the document showed formation of an unlawful association within section 4 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913.

Conclusion: The partnership was not unlawful on the footing that it offended section 4 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913; this issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether, for registration under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the Income-tax Officer could go behind the partnership deed and investigate the beneficial or representative capacity of the persons named as partners.

Analysis: Registration under section 26A turns on whether the firm is constituted under a valid instrument of partnership, the shares are specified, and the partnership is genuine and legally existent. The jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer is confined to the deed and the statutory requirements; he cannot refuse registration by probing behind the instrument to ascertain whether a named partner is really acting for a Hindu undivided family or another beneficial owner. Internal arrangements affecting beneficial enjoyment do not control the legal capacity of the partner vis-a -vis the firm. Since the deed disclosed individual partners and the partnership was otherwise genuine and valid, the statutory conditions for registration were satisfied.

Conclusion: The Income-tax Officer could not go behind the partnership deed for registration purposes, and the firm was entitled to registration under section 26A; this issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The refusal of registration was unsustainable because the partnership was legally valid on the terms of the deed and the statutory enquiry under section 26A could not be enlarged to test beneficial ownership behind the instrument.

Ratio Decidendi: For registration of a firm, the taxing authority must confine itself to the partnership deed and the statutory requirements; if the deed shows a genuine and legally valid partnership with specified shares, registration cannot be refused by inquiring into the partners' beneficial ownership or representative capacity behind the deed.

---