Genuineness of partnership controls firm registration; benami capital alone does not defeat entitlement where evidence supports real partners.

The essential conditions for firm registration were satisfied, leaving only the genuineness of the partnership in issue. The Tribunal, as final fact-finder, held on the evidence that the named partners were not mere dummies or name-lenders for another person. The fact that capital may have come from one source did not by itself justify of registration, and any benami interest did not defeat registration once the partnership was found genuine. The Tribunal's finding rested on relevant evidence and was not shown to be perverse, so the assessee-firm was entitled to registration for the assessment year in question.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee-firm was entitled to registration for the assessment year 1958-59 under the relevant provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and whether the partnership was genuine.

Analysis: The essential conditions for registration of a firm were satisfied, and the only surviving dispute was the genuineness of the partnership. The Tribunal, as the final fact-finding authority, examined the material relied upon by the revenue and concluded that the partners named in the deed were not mere dummies or name-lenders for another person. The fact that capital may have originated from one person did not by itself justify refusal of registration, and the existence of benami interests did not defeat registration once the partnership itself was found to be genuine. The finding of the Tribunal was based on relevant evidence and was not shown to be perverse.

Conclusion: The question was answered in the affirmative, and the assessee-firm was held entitled to registration.

---