Strict compliance for partnership registration under section 26A required; defective applications and later deed changes could not cure the invalidity.

Registration under section 26A was a statutory benefit available only on strict compliance with the prescribed forms and rules, including signatures of all non-minor partners and correct disclosure of partners' profit and loss shares. The applications were invalid because the minor's position was incorrectly shown, and the required indication that he was entitled only to profits was omitted. A later attempt to amend the partnership deed could not cure the defect after the application period had expired, and the plea of substantial compliance was rejected. The later provision in the Income-tax Act, 1961 was held inapplicable, and the assessee was not entitled to registration.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applications for registration and renewal of registration of the firm under section 26A were valid and complied with the prescribed statutory rules.

Analysis: Registration under section 26A was a statutory benefit available only on strict compliance with the section and the rules made under it. The prescribed forms required all non-minor partners to sign and required the share of profits and losses to be correctly stated. The applications filed by the firm did not comply with those requirements, as the minor's share was shown as a share in losses and the prescribed indication that he was only entitled to profits was not made. The later attempt to alter the partnership deed could not cure the defect, because it was made after the time for making the application had expired and there was no finding of condonation of delay. The plea of substantial compliance was rejected, and the later provision in the Income-tax Act, 1961 was held inapplicable.

Conclusion: The applications for registration and renewal were invalid, and the assessee was not entitled to registration.

---