Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.24 seconds)The Coinage Act, 2011
The Indian Partnership Act, 1932
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Section 4 in The Indian Partnership Act, 1932 [Entire Act]
Section 2 in Income Tax Rules, 1962 [Entire Act]
Section 23 in Income Tax Rules, 1962 [Entire Act]
Section 59 in Income Tax Rules, 1962 [Entire Act]
Sir Sundar Singh Majithia vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 4 June, 1942
The first question, therefore, is whether the
benamidar of a person can be a partner of a
firm. Under S. 2(6B) of the Act, "firm",
"partner" and "partnership" have the same
meanings respectively as in the Indian
Partnership Act, 1932 (IX of 1932) : provided
that the expression "partner" includes any
person who being a minor has been admitted to
the benefits of partnership. Under S. 4 of
the Indian Partnership Act, "Partnership" is
the relation between persons who have agreed
to share the profits of a business carried on
by all or any of them acting for all. If the
partnership is genuine, as it is held in the
present case, it follows that the 4 partners
mentioned in the partnership deed must be held
to have agreed to share the profits of the
business carried on by them in the manner
specified in the document. Indeed, in the
present case the Instrument of Partnership and
the application for registration contain clear
recitals that the 4 partners have clear and
definite shares in the profits of the firm.
The Judicial Committee in Sir Sundar Singh
Majithia v. Commissioner of income-tax, C.P. &
U.P. (1) posed the question that arises for
consideration of the Income-tax Officer under
s. 26A of the Act. Sir George Rankin,
speaking for the Board, said :