https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28030 The court upheld the validity of a partnership firm consisting of the karta of a Hindu undivided family (HUF) and four other coparceners from the same HUF as partners. The firm was deemed entitled to registration under the Income Tax Act as the coparceners contributed capital from their separate funds. The court rejected the Revenue's argument that the karta was a benamidar for the other partners, citing precedents allowing coparceners to partner with the karta using separate property. The decision affirmed the partnership's legitimacy, emphasizing the karta's distinct interest in the HUF and the genuine nature of the partnership. The assessee prevailed, with the Revenue instructed to cover costs. en-us Tue, 22 Feb 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Feb 2010 14:21:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28030 The court upheld the validity of a partnership firm consisting of the karta of a Hindu undivided family (HUF) and four other coparceners from the same HUF as partners. The firm was deemed entitled to registration under the Income Tax Act as the coparceners contributed capital from their separate funds. The court rejected the Revenue's argument that the karta was a benamidar for the other partners, citing precedents allowing coparceners to partner with the karta using separate property. The decision affirmed the partnership's legitimacy, emphasizing the karta's distinct interest in the HUF and the genuine nature of the partnership. The assessee prevailed, with the Revenue instructed to cover costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 22 Feb 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28030