SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1954 Supreme(Pat) 33

AHMAD, V.RAMASWAMI
Bhimraj Bansidhar – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner Of Income Tax – Respondent


Judgment

1. In this case Messrs. Bhimraj Bansidhar carried on wholesale business in cloth and also owned house property in the town of Ranchi. The Hindu undivided, family carried on business till 29-6-1946 on which date the books of the business were closed, the accounts were taken and the net assets were divided among all the members of the Hindu undivided family, namely, Bhimraj (father), Janki Devi (mother), and five sons Atma Ram, Chiranjilal Sawarmal, Prabhu Dayal and Jagdish.

2. On 30-6-1946 a new business-under the same name of Bhimraj Bansidhar was started in the first instance with the four major sons as partners of the firm. A deed of partnership was executed by the four sons, Chiranjilal, Atma Ram, Sawarmal and Parbhu Dayal on 3-9-1946, indicating therein that the partnership was formed with retrospective effect from 30-6-1946. This agreement was varied by a second deed of partnership dated 30-10-1946, by which the benefits of the partnership were extended to the minor son Jagdish. For the assessment year 1948-49, the Hindu undivided family filed a return showing an income of Rs. 2612/- and odd. It was claimed by Bansidhar, who filed the return as the karta, that the clot


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top