https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5900 The Tribunal's factual finding that the Satna business was an independent firm with a distinct partnership constitution could not be displaced by the High Court on a reference absent ignored evidence, misdirection, or irrelevant considerations. The Court held that the Tribunal had examined the material, including the business arrangements, capital entries and division of profits, so its conclusion was not open to reappreciation. It also held that registration under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 required a genuine partnership constituted by instrument, with specified shares and profits divided accordingly, and that Hindu joint family members could enter such a partnership without prior partition. The firm was entitled to registration. en-us Fri, 16 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5900 The Tribunal's factual finding that the Satna business was an independent firm with a distinct partnership constitution could not be displaced by the High Court on a reference absent ignored evidence, misdirection, or irrelevant considerations. The Court held that the Tribunal had examined the material, including the business arrangements, capital entries and division of profits, so its conclusion was not open to reappreciation. It also held that registration under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 required a genuine partnership constituted by instrument, with specified shares and profits divided accordingly, and that Hindu joint family members could enter such a partnership without prior partition. The firm was entitled to registration. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 16 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5900