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

2000 Supreme(Del) 922

ARIJIT PASAYAT, D.K.JAIN
K. B. AND COMPANY – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.R.Manjani, P.L.BANSAL, R.C.PANDEY

Arijit Pasayat

( 1 ) ON being moved by the assessee under Section 256 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Bench-C (in short, the Tribunal) has referred the following question for opinion of this court.

1. Whether, on the facts, and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that on a true interpretation of clause 8 of the partnership deed dated 19. 7. 1971 and clause 9 of the partnership deed dated 26. 5. 1972 there was no partnership in existence and what was evident was only an employer-employee relationship in the garb of partnership ? Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in upholding the action of the Revenue in refusing registration for the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75 ?

( 2 ) FACTUAL position as indicated in the statement of case is essentially as follows:- One Brij Lal was carrying on business Ln the name and style of M/s K. B and Co on proprietorship basis upto 30. 6. 1971. With effect from 1. 7. 71, a partnership was con- stituted on the basis of a deed of partnership, which was drawn up on 19. 7. 1971. Shares in profit and loss were as ind













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