1984 (5) TMI 95

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rs, M. subrahmanyam, K.L. Sarojini, M. Lakshmikantam and B. Venkatswarlu. Their shares in profit and loss were 40, 30, 15 and 20 in a total of 105, respectively. The firm was constituted under an instrument of partnership dt. 17th April, 1980 w.e.f. 10th April, 1980. There was a clause in the partnership deed that the accounts of the firm would be closed on any auspicious day before the end of Mar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Judicial Member, was a party, and he submitted that there was no illegality consequent to the closure of accounts being postponed by four days, that is beyond 31st March. He stated that if at all there was any deviation from the partnership deed, it was so minor that it could not be construed as a violation. He pleaded for the grant of registration. The ld. Departmental Representative opposed the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....artners was said to have come into existence with contribution of capital by the new partners out of gifts made by their fathers. The ITO found that the gifts were made subsequent to the commencement of the firm. There were also some other discrepancies which were referred to. On the facts, the Court held that registration was rightly refused. In the order of the Tribunal on which the assessee has....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he partnership deed was purely a matter of internal arrangement as observed by the Supreme Court in Kamath's case in relation to the duties of various partners. So far as the outside world is concerned, there was in fact a valid firm in existence in the present case and merely because an internal arrangement regarding the date of closure of accounts was not adhered to according to the letter of th....