Genuine partnership firm established by factual findings, with deed date treated as a typing mistake and registration upheld.

The genuineness of a partnership firm and the date stated in its deed were treated as questions of fact. The High Court noted that such findings can be interfered with in reference only if unsupported by material or perverse. Because the Tribunal relied on the rectification deed and the firm's acceptance and registration in later years on the same deed, its conclusion was supported by evidence. The date in the partnership deed was therefore treated as a typing mistake, the firm was regarded as genuine, and registration under section 185 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was held justified.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in treating the date in the partnership deed as a typing mistake and holding that a genuine firm had come into existence so as to be entitled to registration under section 185 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis: The question whether the partnership deed was actually executed on a different date and whether the firm was genuine turned on findings of fact. Such findings are not open to challenge in a reference unless they are unsupported by material or are perverse. The Tribunal had material before it, including the rectification deed and the fact that the firm had been accepted and registered in subsequent years on the same deed, and its conclusion could not be said to rest on irrelevant considerations.

Conclusion: The Tribunal's finding was upheld. The date stated in the partnership deed was held to be a typing mistake, the firm was treated as genuine, and registration under section 185 was held to be justified in favour of the assessee.

---