Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

St. Joseph's Provisions Stores Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Kerala

1961 (8) TMI 48 - KERALA HIGH COURT

Income-Tax Referred Case No. 25 of 1959 - Dated:- 16-8-1961 - Ansari (CJ) And Govinda Menon, JJ. For the Assessee : P. Govindan Nair, K. V. R. Shenoi, P. K. Kurien, G. Balagangadharan Nair and K. Sukumaran For the Commissioner : G. Rama Iyer JUDGMENT Ansari, CJ. The assessee is a firm consisting of eight partners, which was constituted under the instrument of September 10, 1953, and the profit for the year ending March 31, 1957, amounted to ₹ 49,129. But on April 10, 1957, the following 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

nt on April 10, 1957, at the same time narrating the share of each partner therein, which corresponds with the partner's profit-sharing ratio under the deed of partnership. The firm applied for registration for the assessment year 1957-58, whose previous year would end on March 31, 1957, and the application was on July 20, 1957. It was accompanied by the forms required under rule 6 of the Income-tax Rules; but the Income-tax Officer rejected that application on two grounds. One was that it w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

credited, the application for registration had been properly rejected, because of the absence of division of profits among the partners and of the shares of the profit in the accounts of each partner. The Appellate Tribunal has disallowed the appeal on the ground of there having been neither division nor crediting of profits in pursuance of the resolution passed on April 10, 1957, and, therefore, the requirement of rule 6 not having been complied with. The Tribunal has, under section 66(1) of 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

quire profit having been actually credited in the accounts of each partner of the firm with the result that, should the profit be credited to the partner elsewhere, that would be sufficient compliance with the form attached to rule 6. We also think those words indicate the ownership in the profits ceasing to be joint and the shares of each partner having become separated rather than each partner being required immediate use of the profits. The Tribunal would concede that, had the accounts of 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

the shares should further be emphasised by the several entries being made in the respective accounts of each partner. The absence of such entries is explainable on the ground that the partners would then become entitled to draw upon the profit and getting immediate benefit in the profits of the firm is not the requirement for obtaining registration under rule 6. We, therefore, feel that the absence of entries in the separate accounts of each partner is not fatal, and the requirement of rule 6 is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version