€0MMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ANDHRA PRADESH, HYDERABAD vs. JAYALAKSHMI RICE AND OIL MILLS CONTRACTOR CO.

CIVIL APPEAL No. 545/1967Supreme Court[1971] 3 S.C.R. 36515 January 1971Bench: 3 JudgesAuthor: J.C. SHAH, K.S. HEGDE, A.N. GROVER5 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

The assessee, a firm constituted under a deed of partnership dated October 6, 1955, with effect from November 5, 1954, applied for registration under Section 26A of the Income-tax Act, 1922, for the assessment year 1956-57. The firm's previous year ended on October 26, 1955. The application was received by the Income-tax Officer on October 14, 1955. Subsequently, on October 20, 1955, the assessee filed a statement under Section 58 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, with the Registrar of Firms. The Registrar made entries in the register of firms on November 2, 1955. The Income-tax Officer refused registration on March 23, 1961, citing the application not being filed in time. Appeals to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal were unsuccessful. The High Court, however, ruled in favor of the assessee, holding the application was in time.

What did the Supreme Court hold?

The Supreme Court held that the High Court's view was incorrect. Under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, registration of a firm takes effect only when the necessary entries are made in the register of firms under Section 59 by the Registrar. Section 58(1) of the Act, which deals with sending the statement to the Registrar, must be read in conjunction with Sections 59 and 69. Section 69, concerning the effect of non-registration, also indicates that registration is effective from the date of entry in the register. Therefore, the firm was not registered under the Partnership Act on October 20, 1955, when the statement was filed, but on November 2, 1955, when the entries were made. Consequently, the application under Section 26A of the Income-tax Act, which required registration under the Partnership Act before the end of the previous year (October 26, 1955), was filed out of time. The appeal was allowed, and the High Court's judgment was set aside.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the application for registration of the firm under Section 26A of the Income-tax Act, 1922, was filed out of time, considering Rule 2(b) of the Income-tax Rules. Assessee's contention: The application was governed by Rule 2(b) and was in time because the firm should be deemed to have been registered on the date the application for registration was presented to the Registrar of Firms (October 20, 1955), not on the date of actual registration by the Registrar (November 2, 1955). Revenue's contention: The application was not filed in time as per Rule 2(b) because the firm was not considered registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, until the entries were made in the register of firms by the Registrar.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 26A,Section 58,Section 59,Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

-• 365 A €0MMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ANDHRA PRADESH, HYDERABAD B c D E F G v . .JAYALAKSHMI RICE AND OIL MILLS CONTRACTOR CO.

January 15, 1971 [J. c. SHAH, C.J., K. s. HEGDE AND A. N. GROVER, JJ.] Income-tax Act, 1922, s. 26A-Income-ta!< Rules, r. 2(b)-Indian Partnership Act, 1932, ss. 58, 59, 69-Rule 2(b) 11taviding that in respect of firms registered under Partnership Act the application for registration of firm u/s 26A of the Income-tax Act shall be made before the end of the previous year-Firm can be said to be registered under Parwrship Act not on date of receipt of app/iCQ/ion under a. 58 but when entry is made in register of firms under s. 59--:-IJ such an entry is made after end of 'previous year' firm is not registered under the Partnership Act for the purpose of r. 2(b).

Tue assessee firm was constituted under a deed of partnership dated October 6, 1955. It was to come into existence with effect from November 5, 1954. Tue assessee filed an application under s. 26A of the Act for registratlon of the firm for the assessment year 1956-51. The previous year of the firm was shown as the year ending October 26, 1955. The application was received by t

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 26A

All 40 judgments and leading authorities on Section 26A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →