1. Application for registration under Section 26-A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 — Rejection based on collective partner description and alleged lack of specified profit-sharing ratios. (Para 1 , 2 )
Back
Next 
1964 Supreme(SC) 324
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
1st December, 1964
P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, C.J.I., M. HIDAYATULLAH, J.C. SHAH, S.M. SIKRI AND R.S. BACHAWAT, JJ.
M/s. Kylasa Sarabhaiah, Appellants
Versus
The Commissioner of Income-tax, Hyderabad, Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 83 of 1964.
Advocates appeared
Mr. A. Ranganadhan Chetty, Senior Advocate, (Mr. K. Venkaramaiah, Miss. A. Vedavalli and Mr. A. V. Rangam, Advocate, with him), for Appellants; M/s. R. Ganapathy Iyer and R. N. Sachthey, Advocates, for Respondent.
Advocates:
A.RANGANADHAM CHETTY, A.V.RANGAM, A.VEDAVALLI, K.VENKARAMAIAH, R.Ganapathy Iyer, R.N.SACH
A.RANGANADHAM CHETTY, A.V.RANGAM, A.VEDAVALLI, K.VENKARAMAIAH, R.Ganapathy Iyer, R.N.SACH
Registration under Section 26-A of the Income-tax Act, 1922, is permissible if individual shares are described or defined in detail, even without precise fractions. A firm listed as a partner is treated as its individual partners joining the partnership.
Headnote:(A) Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 - Section 26-A - Registration of firm - Requirement of specifying individual shares of partners - Meaning of "specify" - The term means mentioning, describing or defining in detail and does not necessarily mean expressly setting out in fractional or other shares (Para 6).
(B) Indian Partnership Act, 1932 - Nature of firm - A firm is an association of persons and not a legal person; an agreement where a firm purports to enter into a partnership with another entity makes the individual partners of that firm partners of the larger partnership (Para 5).
(C) Registration under Section 26-A - Use of collective description for a group of partners does not preclude registration if the substance of the agreement defines the individual shares of the partners (Para 6).
Facts of the case:
A partnership firm applied for registration under Section 26-A of the Income-tax Act. The application was rejected by the tax authorities and subsequently by the High Court on the grounds that the profit-sharing ratios were not specified and that another firm was introduced as a partner in the firm.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the preamble of the partnership deed clearly indicated the distribution of profits and losses among the individual members, including those admitted to the benefits of the partnership. The use of a collective description for some partners did not overshadow the substance of the agreement, and the application was in conformity with the rules.
Issues: Whether the assessee firm was entitled to registration under Section 26-A of the Income-tax Act when the partnership deed used a collective description for some partners and defined shares in a descriptive manner rather than precise fractions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the requirement to "specify" shares under Section 26-A is satisfied if the shares are defined or described in detail, even if not worked out in precise fractions. Furthermore, where a firm is named as a partner, it is construed as the individual partners of that firm becoming partners in the new entity, and such an arrangement does not affect the right to claim registration if statutory conditions are fulfilled.
Result: Appeal allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether registration under Section 26-A is barred when a partner is described as another firm and profit-sharing ratios for certain members are not explicitly fractional. (Para 2 , 6 , 7 )
3. Collective descriptions of partners do not invalidate registration if individual shares are defined in the deed and the agreement is fundamentally between individuals. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 )
4. Registration under Section 26-A requires individual shares to be specified, meaning mentioning or defining them in detail, not necessarily in precise fractions. (Para 6 )
5. Appeal allowed — High Court's negative answer discharged and replaced with an affirmative answer regarding entitlement to registration. (Para 8 , 9 )
6. Can a firm be registered under Section 26-A if one of its partners is described as another firm?
Yes, provided the agreement is in substance between individuals. Since a firm is an association of persons and not a legal person, an agreement with a firm makes the individual partners of that firm partners in the larger partnership. (Para 5 , 6 )
7. What is the legal interpretation of the word specify regarding individual shares of partners for registration under Section 26-A?
The word specify means mentioning, describing, or defining the shares in detail. It does not require the shares to be expressly set out in precise fractions. (Para 6 )
8. Does a defect in the partnership deed of a sub-firm affect the registration of a larger firm in which that sub-firm's partners are members?
No. If the statutory conditions for the registration of the appellant firm are fulfilled, any separate arrangement or defect in the agreement constituting a partner's own firm does not affect the right to claim registration. (Para 7 )
Judgment
SHAH J.: The appellants who are a firm carrying on business in cloth at Secunderabad applied on June 30, 1955, for registration under S. 26-A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, for the assessment year 1956-57. The following persons were, it was recited in the application, partners, having share in the profits and losses in proportions specified against their names:-
1. M/s. Kylasa Sarabhaiah a firm consisting of the following partners:
(a) Kylasa Veeresalingam
(b) Kylasa Nagendrarao
Rs. As. Ps.
(c) Kylasa Madhusudhanarao 0-6-9
2. Mahendrakar Narayanarao .. 0-3-3
3. Nune Vittayya .. 0-2-6
4. Pottupalli Chaudrayya .. 0-2-6
5. Pande Ramayya .. 0-1-0
For facility of reference we will call No. 1 "the yarn shop."
The Income-tax Officer rejected the application, and his order was confirmed in appeal by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal held that because in the deed of partnership benefits to which certain minors were admitted and particulars "about the distribution of profits or losses in the manner in which the firm wanted the same to be distributed" were not specified, and because by the deed of partnership the Yarn Shop was introduced as a partner in the firm, the privilege of registration under S. 26-A must be denied to the firm. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh recorded on the following question referred under S. 66(1) of the Income-tax Act:
"Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to registration under S. 26-A of the Income-tax Act?" a negative answer.
3. Section 26-A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, provides :
"(1) Application may be made to the Income-tax Officer" on behalf of any firm constituted under instrument of partnership, specifying the individual shares of the partners, for registration for the purpose of this Act and of any other enactment for the time being in force relating to income-tax or super-tax.
(2) The application shall be made by such person or persons and at such times and shall certain such particulars and shall be in such form, and be verified in such manner, as may be prescribed and it shall be dealt with by the Income-tax Officer in such manner as may be prescribed. "
By securing registration under the Act, the partners of the firm obtain a benefit of lower rates of assessment and no tax is directly charged on the income of the firm. This is an important benefit to which the partners of a registered firm become entitled as a consequence of registration and if it is intended to secure that benefit, requirement of S. 26-A and the rules framed under the Act must be strictly complied with. Rule 2 framed under S. 59 requires that the application shall be signed by the partners (not being minors) personally, and prescribes the period within which the application shall be made for the year in question. Rule 3 provides that the application shall be made in the prescribed form and shall be accompanied by the original instrument of partnership under which the firm is constituted. By R. 4 it is provided that if on receipt of the application, the Income-tax Officer is satisfied that there is or was a firm in existence constituted as shown in the instrument of partnership, and that the application has been properly made, he shall enter in writing at the foot of the instrument or certified copy, as the case may be, a certificate in the prescribed form. by R. 6 the certificate of registration may be renewed for subsequent years.
4. Registration of the firm may be obtained on an application to the Income-tax Officer on behalf of any firm, if the firm be lawfully constituted under an instrument of partnership which specifies, the individual shares of partners and the Income-tax Officer is satisfied that there is or was a genuine firm in existence as shown in the instrument. If the conditions are fulfilled, the Income-tax Officer has no power to reject the application. Undoubtedly, the application must strictly be in conf
