<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1967 (1) TMI 84 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192860</link>
    <description>A partnership deed is construed as a whole, and an express recital admitting minors only to the benefits of partnership will govern ancillary clauses on profits, losses, accounts and management. On that construction, the deed does not make the minors full partners or impose personal liability inconsistent with section 30 of the Partnership Act, 1932, so a valid firm comes into existence. Where the firm is validly constituted and the minors are only beneficiaries, registration under section 26A is not prejudicial to revenue merely because of a technical defect in the renewal application, especially where the defect is capable of rectification. Cancellation of registration was therefore unwarranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Jun 2017 16:40:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=475685" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (1) TMI 84 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192860</link>
      <description>A partnership deed is construed as a whole, and an express recital admitting minors only to the benefits of partnership will govern ancillary clauses on profits, losses, accounts and management. On that construction, the deed does not make the minors full partners or impose personal liability inconsistent with section 30 of the Partnership Act, 1932, so a valid firm comes into existence. Where the firm is validly constituted and the minors are only beneficiaries, registration under section 26A is not prejudicial to revenue merely because of a technical defect in the renewal application, especially where the defect is capable of rectification. Cancellation of registration was therefore unwarranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192860</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>