Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 28 (0.26 seconds)Section 47 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Companies Act, 1956
Section 48 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Indian Partnership Act, 1932
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Gujarat vs Mohanbhai Pamabhai on 24 September, 1971
and on dissolution of the firm or on his retirement from the partnership, to get the value of his share in the net assets of the firm. When, therefore, on dissolution or retirement, a partner's share in the net partnership asset is determined on taking accounts, what he receives is his share in the partnership and not any consideration for transfer of his interest in the partnership. In such a situation, there is no transfer of interest within the definition of section 2(47) of the Act. These propositions are clearly laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Fisheries Co. v. CIT (1979) 120 ITR 49 and in the case of CIT v. Mohanbhai Pamabhai (1973191 ITR 393 (Guj) was affirmed by the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Additional CIT v. Mohanbhai Pamabhai (1987) 165 ITR 166. Thus, when upon retirement of a partner or dissolution of a firm when the partnership accounts are adjusted by payment of cash or any partnership asset, there would be no capital gain to be attached under section 45(1) in the hands of the partners.
Malabar Fisheries Co, Calcutta vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kerala on 19 September, 1979
and on dissolution of the firm or on his retirement from the partnership, to get the value of his share in the net assets of the firm. When, therefore, on dissolution or retirement, a partner's share in the net partnership asset is determined on taking accounts, what he receives is his share in the partnership and not any consideration for transfer of his interest in the partnership. In such a situation, there is no transfer of interest within the definition of section 2(47) of the Act. These propositions are clearly laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Fisheries Co. v. CIT (1979) 120 ITR 49 and in the case of CIT v. Mohanbhai Pamabhai (1973191 ITR 393 (Guj) was affirmed by the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Additional CIT v. Mohanbhai Pamabhai (1987) 165 ITR 166. Thus, when upon retirement of a partner or dissolution of a firm when the partnership accounts are adjusted by payment of cash or any partnership asset, there would be no capital gain to be attached under section 45(1) in the hands of the partners.