GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

1974 (5) TMI 118 - Supreme Court Of India

1974 (5) TMI 118 - Supreme Court Of India - 1974 AIR 1094, 1975 SCR (1) 358, 1974 SCC (2) 642 - Civil Appeal No. 143 of 1969. - Dated:- 1-5-1974 - Khanna Hans Raj, Beg M. Hameedullah And Chandrachud Y.V., JJ. S. T. Desai, K. L. Hathi and P. C. Kapur for the appellants. K. S. Cooper, A. B. Diwan, Vasant Kotwal and I. N. Shroff for the respondent. JUDGMENT: Khanna Hans raj, This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court affirming on appea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e partnership consisted of three mills at Ambernath. One of them was a woollen mill, the other was a silk mill and the third was an oil and leather cloth factory with land, bungalows and shawls attached thereto. In addition to that, there was a bobbin factory at Taradeo with offices at Bombay, Ahmedabad and other places. For the sake of convenience the above property may be described, as it was done in the High Court, as "Ambernath Mills". Although the case involves a tangled skein of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rivate limited company was formed of 31 persons for taking over the management of the mills. ₹ 25,000 were contributed by each one of those persons in that connection. The appellants and the respondent too were members of the company. Appellant No. 1 and the respondent had migrated at the time of partition from Gujarat in West Punjab. The respondent was a big industrialist and left behind extensive properties in Pakistan. He held verified claim of rupees 23 lakhs in lieu of property left b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d by the Custodian to grant, a lease of the Ambernath Mills to the respondent and the two appellants. On August 30, 1952 two documents were executed. One of the documents was an agreement of partnership between the two appellants and the respondent for carrying on the business of Ambernath Mill s under the lease in the name and style of Shri Ambernath Mills Corporation. The other document was the agreement of lease executed by the Custodian of Evacuee Property as lessor and the appellants and th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ubject to sooner determination thereof on any of the contingencies provided in clause 21 or on the breach of any condition on the part of the lessees or in the event of any dispute among the lessees resulting in the closure of the mills. it was also provided that the lessees would purchase and the lessor would sell to the lessees at an agreed price the stocks of raw materials, unsold finished goods, consumer s stores, spare parts, cars and trucks and other movables which had already been vested .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

contained a provision for reference of any dispute arising out of the agreement of lease to arbitrators chosen by the parties by mutual consent. The annual rent payable by the lessees was fixed at ₹ 6,00,000 payable in four quarterly instalments of Rs, 1,50000 each on or before 30th day of each quarter. The lessees also undertook to deposit or furnish bank guarantee in the, sum of ₹ 7.00,000 as security for the payment of the value of raw material, unsold finished goods,, stores. spa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dia, Ministry of Rehabilitation, and such value as is determined shall be taken as price for acquisition by the lessees of the full proprietary interest in the demised premises in the manner shown in the next succeeding paragraph. 18.The Lessees, being all displaced persons from Pakistan and having left large properties in Pakistan, have all of them put in claims in respect of their proper-ties and other assets left by them in Pakistan under the Displaced Persons Claims Act, 1950. When the claim .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n case the value of the aggregate compensation payable to the Lessees is equivalent to the value of the demised premises as assessed, the Lessor shall convey the demised premises absolutely to them as full proprietors thereof, their interest in the demised premises being in proportion to the compensation payable to each of the Lessees and the respective shares in the proprietary interest shall be adjusted according to the amount of compensation payable to each as finally determined. 19.In case t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s in the ownership of the proprietary interest to be allotted as aforesaid other displaced persons who have left industrial concerns in Pakistan, so that the total compensation payable to the Lessees and the others thus associated is equivalent to the total value of the demised premises and the said demised premises shall then become the absolute property of the Lessees and others thus associated in proportion to the total compensation payable to each as finally determined. 21.The lease to be gr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

be at liberty to continue the lease for the unexpired residue of the term on the terms and conditions and yearly rent prescribed here- under, the yearly rent being adjusted proportionately to the extent of the proprietary interest allotted and transferred to the Lessees." According to the partnership agreement executed by the two appellants and the respondent on August 30, 1952, each partner had agreed to contribute a capital of ₹ 1,00,000. The amount of ₹ 25,000 already paid b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nt and control of the business by the respondent. The respondent was also authorized to form a limited liability company for running the business of the partnership with the consent of the Custodian and the appellants agreed to join the company as shareholders on such terms and conditions as might be agreed when such company was formed. The period of the partnership was five years "being the period of said lease". The partnership took possession of Amberath Mills on August 31, 1952. Th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

agreement of lease were in the meantime valued by an auditor appointed by the Custodian at rupees 30 lakhs. The Custodian called upon the partnership in April 1953 to pay a sum of rupees 7 lakhs or to furnish a bank guarantee for the said amount as provided in the agreement of lease. This payment could not be made by the partnership. There was also difficulty in paying the sixth instalment of the rent. A cheque for ₹ 1,50,000 was issued but the same was dishonored. Subsequently, arrangeme .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d by, the partnership on February 16, 1954 in the Bombay High Court for quashing the notice issued by the Custodian. In the meantime, the second appellant sent letter dated February 8, 1954 to the respondent suggesting that his share in the partnership be reduced to 1 anna in a rupee or to such other fraction as the respondent thought fit. A similar letter was addressed by the first appellant. On February 24, 1954 the parties entered into a second agree- ment of partnership. It was agreed in the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

30, 1953 were to be made up on the basis of the partnership agreement dated August 30, 1952 and the profits and losses for that period were to be distributed accordingly. The capital of the partnership was agreed to be arranged by the respondent and he was to be the managing partner in control of the entire affairs of the partnership. He was also to get interest at 6 per cent on all finances arranged by him. The appellants agreed to carry on such duties in the concern as might be assigned to th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

his Court was granted by the High Court on May 5, 1954. Stay order was also issued on that day restraining the Custodian from dispossessing the respondent and the appellants from Ambernath Mills. Appeal against the decision of the Division Bench of Bombay High Court was then filed in this Court. The Custodian of Evacuee Property made an order on May 25, 1954 cancelling the agreement of lease of Amberanath Mills dated August 30, 1952. The possession of the mills was voluntarily delivered by, the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 came into force on October 9, 1954. On March 10, 1955 the Central Government issued notification under section 12 of that Act acquiring the Ambernath Mills. An advertisement was then issued by the Central Government for the sale of Ambernath Mills. Tenders for the purchase of the mills were required to be submitted by July 9, 1955. On June 7, 1955 a representation was made by SAMCO that in view of the pendency of its appeal in the Supreme Court in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as made after the last date for the receipt of tenders. The appeal referred to above filed by the partnership in this Court against the judgment of the Bombay High Court was dismissed by this Court on November 10, 1955 vide reported case Rai Bahadur Kanwar Raj Nath & Ors. v. Pramod C. Bhatt, Custodian of Evacuee Property([1955] 2 S.C.R. 977). This Court held that the Custodian had the power of cancelling the lease under section 12 of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act and that the no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed the partnership that its offer to purchase the mills for ₹ 55,55,555 was rejected. The partnership thereafter withdrew its subsequent offer of purchase of the mills for ₹ 75,00,000. On January 31, 1956 a suit was filed on behalf of the partnership against the Custodian and the Central Government for permanent injunction restraining them from selling Ambernath Mills to any person other than the partners. The said suit was dismissed by the City Civil Court Bombay on October 8, 1956. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ulars and that the agreement of sale was not capable of specific performance. The Division Bench further held that the Central Government by virtue of notification dated March 10, 1955 acquired the mills free from all encumbrances and that such right as SAMCO might have had of specific performance of agreement of sale was in the nature of an encumbrance. The Central Government, according to the Division Bench, must be deemed to have acquired the mills free from that encumbrance. No appeal was fi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the agreement as earnest money and in part payment of the purchase price. This amount could be paid either in cash or by adjustment of net compensation payable to the respondent or to other displaced persons who might assign their verified claim in favour of the respondent. A further sum of ₹ 28,00,000 was to be paid within three months from the date of the agreement either in cash or by adjustment of the net compensation payable to displaced persons who assigned their verified claims in f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he Custodian in respect of the claim referred to arbitration. On September 20, 1957 the first appellant executed an agreement for the transfer of his compensation claim amounting to ₹ 6,994. The amount was to be repaid to the first appellant within three years with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum. It was stated in the agreement that the respondent was contemplating to form a joint stock company to own, run and manage the mills. The respondent agreed that in the event of such a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

13, 1957 the respondent and the Custodian agreed before the arbitrator that the dues of the Custodian against the partnership be settled at ₹ 18,00,000. A consent award awarding ₹ 18,00,000 in favour of the Custodian against the partnership was made by Mr. Morarji Desai on the following day, viz., November 14, 1957. The award was made a rule of the court on May, 1, 1958. The respondent was unable to submit to the Central Government compensation claims to the extent of ₹ 30,00, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

award of Mr. Morarji Desai, in all, ₹ 48,11,000. It was agreed that the aforesaid amount would be paid by the respondent in seven annual installments. A second supplemental agreement was executed by the President and the respondent on April 6, 1960, but we are not concerned with that. On April 21, 1960 the grant of the Ambernath Mills was made by the President to the respondent. The same day the respondent executed in favour of the President a mortgage of the Ambernath Mills for the paymen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ts was being prepared. One such letter was sent to the first appellant. He also received a statement of account and in September 1960 a cheque for ₹ 204 was sent to him by way of interest. On October 7, 1960 the first appellant sent a letter to the respondent complaining that his property had been attached in execution of a decree for ₹ 271.44 which had been obtained by a creditor against SAMCO. In this letter the first appellant hinted that he was a partner of the respondent. The re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

termination of the lease. The agreement between the parties was further stated to be that "the partnership should be continued for the purpose of acquiring on behalf and for the benefit of the said partnership the properties Ex. 1 (Ambernath Mills) hereto and to exploit the said industries". The respondent was stated to have made a representation that he was acquiring the Ambernath Mills on behalf of the partnership and that the agreement had been executed in the respondent s name bec .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

re adverse to those of the appellants. The properties and profits acquired by the respondent were stated to be for the benefit of the partnership also. In the plaint, as it was initially filed, the appellants prayed for a declaration that the partnership between them and the respondent was still subsisting on the terms and conditions set out in partnership deed dated February 24, 1954 excepting the terms relating to the period of partnership. Prayer was made for a declaration that the Ambernath .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ds of the partnership were utilized for the payment of various creditors of the partnership and after those payments were made the partnership did not have sufficient funds to pay to the remaining creditors. With regard to the negotiations for the acquisition of the mills, the respondent stated that the first appellant was aware that Ambernath Mills were being acquired by the respondent for himself alone. The respondent denied that he ever told the first appellant that the amount of earnest mone .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hat there was an oral agreement of partnership between the parties, the same should be taken to have been dissolved. Learned trial judge held that the appellants had failed to prove that there was an oral agreement between the parties on or about May 25, 1954. It was further held that there was no agreement, express or implied, to form a partnership for acquiring the mills and for carrying on the business thereon. The appellants were held not entitled to have the mills treated as partnership ass .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed by the two appellants and the respondent against the Custodian and the Central Government for permanent injunction was finally dismissed in appeal by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court or on August 30, 1957 when the period of the lease came to an end. In appeal before the Division Bench the following four contentions were advanced on behalf of the appellants : "(1) that on 25th May 1954 the parties expressly agreed to continue their partnership for acquiring the Mills and exploiti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dence between them; (3)that, even supposing that there was no express or implied agreement as stated above, the rights acquired by the defendant as a result of his agreement with the President of India dated 14th August 1957 and the subsequent Presidential grant are impressed with a trust in favour of the partnership under section 88 of the Indian Trusts Act; and (4)that, even if it is held that the Mills are no longer an asset of the partnership, the plaintiffs are still entitled to accounts of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s to get the Custodian s order dated May 25, 1954 set aside came to an end with the decision of the Supreme Court. The present suit for rendition of accounts brought on December 20, 1960 more than three years after the date of the dissolution of the partnership was held to be barred by limitation. In the result the appeal was dismissed. In appeal before us Mr. S.T. Desai on behalf of the appellants has frankly, conceded that he is not in a position to challenge the concurrent findings of the tri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the partnership under section 88 of the Indian Trusts Act, no arguments were ultimately advanced by him on that score. Mr. Desai has, however, challenged the finding of the trial judge and the appellate bench that no implied agreement as alleged by the appellants could be inferred from the material on record. The main burden of the arguments of Mr. Desai, however, has been that the appellants were entitled to the accounts of the partnership which admittedly existed between the parties as per .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

whether the implied agreement as alleged by the appellants can be inferred from the material on record. In this respect Mr. Desai has submitted that the appellants no longer claim any interest in the ownership of Ambernath Mills which. now vest in the respondent. It is, however, urged that an agreement can be inferred from the conduct of the parties that Ambernath Mills were to be run by the respondent in partnership with the appellants, even though the ownership of the same might vest in the re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

agreement of lease shows that Ambernath Mills would become the absolute property not only of the appellants and the respondent but of all persons who were to be associated with the lessees in the ownership of the proprietary interest in proportion to the total compensation payable to each of them. The agreement of lease further contemplated that the lessee rights of the two appellants and the respondent were to be distinct from the proprietary interest in the demised premises and that the lessee .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n that in case Ambernath Mills was transferred, the same would vest in all the 30 displaced persons whose claims were submitted, There are two documents which run counter to the stand taken oil behalf of the appellants in this Court that there was an implied agreement that in case the respondent acquired the ownership of the mills, the mills would be worked by the respondent in partnership with the appellants. One of those documents is agreement dated September 20, 1957 which was signed by the f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

being formed, the first appellant would have the option to purchase shares of the said company to the extent of 50 per cent of the amount of the adjusted claim compensation. In case the option was exercised in favour of the purchase of the shares of the company, the respondent was to ensure that the said shares would be allotted to the first appellant at par. It was further agreed that if the shares applied for or any proportion thereof were not allotted to the first appellant by the said compan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bond dated September 21, 1957. All that was agreed by the respondent in those two documents was that in case he promoted a company for owning, running and managing of the Ambernath Mills, the first appellant would get a share of the value of half of his ,claim compensation of ₹ 6,994. The said amount when compared to the price of Ambernath Mills was wholly insignificant. No question could arise for the respondent borrowing money from the first appellant for payment of price of the mills in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he responsibility for the payment of such arrears of sales tax was that of the respondent and the first appellant was no more in picture. The above letter shows that the first appellant repudiated his liability for the payment of the sales tax by disclaiming his connection with the ,business in question. Our attention has been invited by Mr. Desai to the following observations contained in the judgment of the appellate bench : "There is no dispute between the parties that the partners met o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Agreement. of- Lease. What is disputed is whether it was agreed between the parties that, after acquiring the proprietary interest in the Mills, the business of the Mills should be carried on in partnership between the parties. It is the defendant s case that the proprietary interest in the Mills was sought to reacquired by the partners for certain incidental advantages but that it was never intended that the Mills after acquisition should be run in partnership under the terms agreed in the par .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the implied agreement referred to by Mr. Desai can be drawn from the material on record. So far as the question is concerned as to whether the claim for rendition of accounts was within time, we find that according to clause 16 of the partnership deed dated August 30, 1952 the period of partnership was fixed at five years, being the period of the lease, Clause 17 of the deed of partnership dated February 24, 1954 provided that the "period of partnership shall be the outstanding period of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

an Partnership Act, subject to contract between the, partners a firm is dissolved- (a) if constituted for a fixed term, by the expiry of that term; (b) if constituted to carry out one or more adventures or undertakings by the completion thereof; (c) by the death of a partner; and (d) by the adjudication of a partner as an insolvent." The above provision makes it clear that unless some contract between the partners to the contrary is proved, the firm if constituted for a fixed term would be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ase of Ambernath Mills. The, lease, however, ran into rough weather. On February 12, 1954 the Custodian served notice on the respondent and the two appellants to show cause why the agreement of lease should not be cancelled in accordance with the terms of that agreement on account of the breach of conditions in the matter of payment of instalment of rent and the failure of the respondent and the appellants to deposit or furnish bank guarantee for the amount of ₹ 7,00,000. The respondent an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

judgment dated November 10, 1955 that there was no legal infirmity in the notice for the termination of the lease issued by the Custodian. After the above judgment of this Court, whatever hope or expectation the partners of SAMCO had of running Ambernath Mills on lease under the agreement of lease dated August 30, 1952 came to an end and were extinguished. In the meantime, as already stated earlier, the possession of Ambernath Mills was handed over by the partners of SAMCO to the ,Custodian on J .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he appellants for permanent injunction restraining the Central Government and the Custodian from selling the Ambernath Mills to any person other than the partners of SAMCO. The suit was dismissed by the City Civil Court and the appeal filed by the partners of SAMCO too was dismissed by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court on January 14, 1957. The Division Bench held that the agreement of purchase contained in clauses 17 to 21 of the agreement of lease was indefinite and vague and such agree .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he ownership of Ambernath Mills under clauses 17 to 21 of the agreement of lease was also thus dashed to the ground. View was expressed by the learned trial judge that the firm of SAMCO stood dissolved on May 25, 1954 when the lease was cancelled. Another date of dissolution, according to the learned judge, could be January 14, 1957 when the suit filed by the partners of that firm against the Custodian and the Central Government for permanent injunction was finally dismissed by the High Court. T .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he, question as to-whether the firm got dissolved earlier than August 30, 1957 is purely academic and is not of much significance, because in any event in the absence of a contract to the contrary there could be no survival of the firm after August 30, 1957 when the period of partnership expired. Calculating the period of limitation even from that date, the suit for rendition of accounts brought by the appellants on December 20, 1960 was barred by limitation. It is not disputed that the period o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e end of December 1956 the firm was actively interested in acquiring the mills. The above letter and statement, in our opinion, would not militate against the inference that the firm stood subsequently dissolved on August 30, 1957. As already mentioned above, no agreement to keep the firm in existence after the expiry of the fixed period of partnership has been proved on the record. Reference has also been made on behalf of the appellants to the consent given by the respondent on behalf of SAMCO .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e Custodian of ₹ 30,00,000 on account of the price of stocks of raw material, stores and other movables as well as about the arrears of rent. Counter-claim had also been made by SAMCO against the Custodian for a sum of ₹ 17,67,080 as per written statement dated December 18, 1956 filed in arbitration proceedings. The consent which was given by the respondent on November 13, 1957 was with a view to get the dispute between SAMCO with the Custodian finally settled. This was a necessary s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

transactions begun but unfinished at the time of the dissolution, but not otherwise. The word "transaction" in section 47 refers not merely to commercial transaction of purchase and sale but would include also all other matters relating to the affairs of the partnership. The completion of a transaction would cover also the taking of necessary steps in connection with the adjudication of a dispute to which a firm before its dissolution is a party. The legal position in this respect has .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tained before the dissolution, and that notice to him of the dishonour o f a bill of exchange is sufficient, and that he can withdraw a deposit or sell the partnership assets, or pledge them for the purpose of completing a transaction already commenced, or of securing a debt already incurred, or the over-draft on the partnership current account at the bank." The proposition, in our opinion, cannot be disputed that after dissolution, the partnership subsists merely for the purpose of complet .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

artnership, viz., August 30, 1957. The proposition of law referred to by Mr. Desai that a dissolution does not necessarily follow because a partnership has ceased to do business would not be of any material help to the appellants because we are not basing our conclusion of the dissolution of the firm of the parties upon the fact that the partnership bad ceased to do business. On the contrary, we have arrived at the above conclusion in accordance with the principle of law that a firm constituted .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version