https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276192 A partnership deed executed after disruption of a joint Hindu family was treated as genuine, not a sham, where the surrounding facts supported a real partnership. Joint living and messing after disruption did not by itself negate the arrangement, exclusive management by one partner was consistent with the deed, and continuance of the bank account in the former style was not inconsistent with genuineness. Purchase of stamp papers before disruption and delayed registration under the Partnership Act were held legally immaterial because such registration was not compulsory and was not required for registration under section 26A. The material on record did not support a colourable arrangement. en-us Mon, 17 Sep 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:21:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276192 A partnership deed executed after disruption of a joint Hindu family was treated as genuine, not a sham, where the surrounding facts supported a real partnership. Joint living and messing after disruption did not by itself negate the arrangement, exclusive management by one partner was consistent with the deed, and continuance of the bank account in the former style was not inconsistent with genuineness. Purchase of stamp papers before disruption and delayed registration under the Partnership Act were held legally immaterial because such registration was not compulsory and was not required for registration under section 26A. The material on record did not support a colourable arrangement. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 17 Sep 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276192