AIR 1956 SUPREME COURT 354 ::1956 SCR 154 ::1956 (1) MadLJ164 ::1956 SCJ 317 ::1956 29 ITR 535

Supreme Court Of India

17th February 1956

Hon'ble Judge(s): S. R. Das, N. H. Bhagwati, T. L. Venkatarama Ayyar , JJJ

Income-Tax Act (11 of 1922) , S.26A— Firm is not "person" - Definition of "person" in S. 3 (42), General Clauses Act, cannot be imported in S. 4, Partnership Act - Partnership between firms and individuals - Registration under S. 26A. Partnership Act (9 of 1932) , S.4— General Clauses Act (10 of 1897) , S.3(42)— Words and phrases - "Firm".Words and Phrases - "Person". To import the definition of the word "person" occurring in S. 3 (42), General Clauses Act, 1897, into S. 4, Partnership Act, will be totally repugnant to the subject of partnership law, the word "persons" in S. 4, Partnership Act contemplates only natural or artificial, i.e., legal persons and a firm is not a "person" and as such is not entitled to enter into a partnership with another firm or Hindu undivided family or individual. In this view of the matter there can arise no question of registration of a partnership purporting to be one between firms, a Hindu undivided family business and an individual as a firm under section 26-A Case law Ref.(Para 16) Assuming that there is no legal impediment in the way of all the members of all the constituent firms and the karta of the Hindu undivided family and the individual entering into an agreement, in order to be entitled to the benefit of registration, it will have to be shown that the shares of all ind....