Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.23 seconds)
Paramount Impex, Ludhiana vs Assessee on 2 February, 2016 cites

Malabar Fisheries Co, Calcutta vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kerala on 19 September, 1979

"4. I have considered the facts of the case and the basis of disallowance made by the AO and also the arguments of the AR on the issue. The main logic behind AO's conclusion is that the partnership firm and the partners don't constitute two separate legal persons and therefore the provisions of Section 10(10D) were not applicable in the case of partnership firm taking keyman insurance policy. The AO's view gains strength from the judgement of Apex Court in the case of Malabar Fisheries Company Vs. CIT 120 ITR 49. The AR on the other hand has argued that partnership from and the partners are two separate legal persons under the I.T.Act 1961 and separate assessment of income is done in the case of both the persons. It was further submitted it is only under the general law that partnership firm and the partners are considered as same and therefore the specific legal identity of the partnership firm as distinct from the partners as created by the Income Tax Act could not be ignored. The AR also placed reliance on the decision of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO Modi Motors 27 SOT 476 wherein it has been held that partners are mind, heart and body of firm due to which the firm is able to conduct its business and therefore the keyman insurance policy on the life of partners was allowable expenditure.
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 243 - V D Tulzapurkar - Full Document
1