Representative partnership by coparceners can still qualify for tax registration when a genuine partnership relation exists.

A firm remained eligible for registration where two coparceners entered the partnership in a representative capacity on behalf of the same Hindu undivided family, because the Income-tax Officer had to examine whether a genuine partnership existed, not the beneficial ownership of the partners' shares. A Hindu undivided family is not itself a juristic person for all purposes, but its manager or members may contract in a representative capacity. Since the arrangement satisfied the statutory concept of partnership under the Partnership Act, the firm was entitled to registration under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and the reference was answered in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether a firm could be granted registration under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 where two coparceners of a Hindu undivided family entered the partnership in a representative capacity.

Analysis: The legal position was that a Hindu undivided family is not a juristic person for all purposes and cannot itself enter into a partnership, but its manager or one or more members may contract with a stranger in a representative capacity. The fact that the two partners represented the same Hindu undivided family interest did not make the partnership invalid, because the Income-tax Officer was concerned with the existence of a real partnership and not with the beneficial ownership of the share. Section 4 of the Partnership Act recognises the relation between persons who agree to share profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all, and the firm was therefore capable of registration.

Conclusion: The firm was entitled to registration under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and the answer to the referred question was in the affirmative, against the Revenue.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was dismissed and the decision upholding registration of the firm was maintained.

Ratio Decidendi: A partnership is not invalid for registration purposes merely because two partners who enter the firm do so on behalf of the same Hindu undivided family; what matters is the existence of a genuine partnership relation under the law.

---