An instrument of partnership can be either one single document or a number of documents reading together stipulating the rights and duties of the parties as well as their profit sharing ratio and that it is not necessary that there should be one single document.

SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J.

( 1 ) FOR the assessment years 1968-69, and 1969-70, under Section 256 (1) of the I. T, Act, 1961, the following question has been referred to this court :"whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a correct interpretation of Section 184 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and Rules 22 to 24 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, the Tribunal misdirected itself in law in holding that the assessee was entitled to registration ?"

( 2 ) THE assessee-firm was constituted by a deed of partnership dated 31st December, 1965, consisting of six partners and one Bhimchand Mangalchand Chowdhury, a minor admitted to the benefits of the partnership. After reciting the shares of the parties it has been set out by the Tribunal in a statement of the case which contained, inter alia, the following clauses :"12. On and from the first day of month next succeeding the month in which the said Bhimchand Mangalchand Chowdhuri attains majority, he shall, if he elects to be a partner, be admitted as a partner in this partnership on the terms and conditions as to capital contribution and sharing of profits and losses among the partners as hereinafter mentioned as from the said date and the parties will execute such deeds on writing as may be necessary or proper.

Names of partners Capital contribution

Share of profit Share of loss Mrs. Ratanben Mangalchand Choudhuri 10,000 16 18 Mrs. Bhartiben Shantilal Choudhuri 10,000 16 18 Mrs. Shantaben Surajmal Choudhuri 10,000 16 18 Hirachand Mangalchand Choudhuri 10,000 16 18 Rajnikant Dhirajlal Kamdar . 10 5 Mahendra Kumar Dhirajlal Kamdar . 10 5 Bhimchand Mangalchand Choudhuri 10,000 16 18 . 50,000 100 100

Rs . % %

 

13. It is hereby agreed and declared that this partnership is only between the six contracting parties hereto, namely, (1) Mrs. Ratanben, (2) Mrs. Bhartiben, (3) Mrs. Shantaben, (4) Mr. Hirachand, (5) Mr. Rajni-kant and (6) Mr. Mahendrakumar and through Mr. Hirachand is the karta of his HUF are not and are not to be regarded as partners (sic ). "

( 3 ) IT is not necessary for us to set out the other clauses which have been referred to by the Tribunal. The assessee made an application for registration under Section 185 of the 1961 Act, for two years under reference. The ITO, however, rejected the case, for the reasons mentioned in the order passed under Section 185 of the 1961 Act. The Assistant Commissioner upheld this order. There was an appeal. The Tribunal, after noticing the rival contentions and referring to the relevant provisions of law, observed, inter alia, as follows :"8. 1. There is no dispute that the assessee in the present appeals fulfilled conditions (ii) to (v ). The only dispute between the assessee and Revenue is regarding the condition No. (i ). According to the Department, the partners of the assessee should have executed a fresh deed of partnership on Sri B. M. Choudhuri's attaining majority, while, the assessee contended that reading the deed of partnership dated 31st December, 1963, along with the letters passed between the partners, there was 'an instrument of partnership specifying the individual shares of the partners'. In our opinion, an instrument of partnership can be either one single document or a number of documents reading together stipulating the rights and duties of the parties as well as their profit sharing ratio and that it is not necessary that there should be one single document as submitted on behalf of the Department. The facts obtaining in the decision of the Allahabad High Court Ganeshlal Laxmi Narain v. CIT [1968] 68 ITR 696 (All)--Ed. on which great reliance was placed on behalf of the Revenue, are clearly distinguishable from the facts which are to be found in the assessee's case. In that case, the name of the partner, who was admitted to the benefits of the partnership, was nowhere mentioned in the deed of partnership. In the present case, Sri B. M. Choudhuri's name has not only

Click Here to Read the rest of this document