9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Registration of a partnership firm under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. 2. Interpretation of a deed of partnership to determine if it constitutes a partnership or a pooling arrangement. Analysis: The judgment delivered by the Gujarat High Court pertained to a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, regarding the registration of a partnership firm for the assessment year 1953-54. The applicant, Baroda City Ice Co., sought registration under the Act, which was initially refused by the Income-tax Officer but later directed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The dispute revolved around whether the deed of partnership dated August 20, 1951, constituted a partnership or a pooling arrangement for the sale of ice (para 1-2). The deed of partnership outlined the parties involved, their independent businesses, and the agreement to carry on business in partnership under the name "The Baroda Ice Co." The clauses of the deed specified the partnership's nature of selling ice manufactured by each party, purchasing ice from partners on credit, and selling it at fixed prices. The deed also restricted partners from expanding their ice plants or engaging in new ice-related businesses in Baroda (para 3-4). The Commissioner of Income-tax argued that the arrangement was a pooling agreement rather than a partnership, emphasizing the clause requiring payment "as and when" moneys on the sale of goods were recovered by the partnership. However, the court disagreed, stating that the intention was for the Baroda City Ice Co. to purchase ice from partners and sell it at fixed prices, satisfying the criteria of a partnership under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 (para 5-6). The court modified the framed question to determine whether the Baroda City Ice Co. was entitled to be registered as a firm under the Income-tax Act, to which the answer was affirmative. The Commissioner was directed to pay the costs of the reference to the assessee, concluding the judgment (para 7).
|
