Ram Laxman Sugar Mills v. CIT

66 ITR 613Supreme Court of India1967#16091 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2020.

Judgments citing Ram Laxman Sugar Mills v. CIT

INDRANI PATNAIK,ROURKELA vs. DCIT, RORUKELA CIRCLE, ROURKELA

In the result, appeals of the revenue for assessment years 2012-13 &

ITA 393/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam,, CIT DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.389 & 390/CTK/2017 Assessment Years : 2012-2013 & 2013-14 ACIT, Rourkela Circle, Vs. Smt. Indrani Patnaik A-6, Rourkela Commercial Estate, Civil Township, Rourkela PAN/GIR No.ACCPP 6164 E (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) ITA Nos.393 & 394/CTK/2017 Assessment Years : 2012-2013 & 2013-14 Smt. Indrani Patnaik A-6, Vs. ACIT, Rourkela Circle, Commercial Estate, Civil Rourkela Township, Rourkela PAN/GIR No.ACCPP 6164 E (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by…

ACIT, RORUKELA CIRCLE, ROURKELA vs. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, appeals of the revenue for assessment years 2012-13 &

ITA 389/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam,, CIT DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.389 & 390/CTK/2017 Assessment Years : 2012-2013 & 2013-14 ACIT, Rourkela Circle, Vs. Smt. Indrani Patnaik A-6, Rourkela Commercial Estate, Civil Township, Rourkela PAN/GIR No.ACCPP 6164 E (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) ITA Nos.393 & 394/CTK/2017 Assessment Years : 2012-2013 & 2013-14 Smt. Indrani Patnaik A-6, Vs. ACIT, Rourkela Circle, Commercial Estate, Civil Rourkela Township, Rourkela PAN/GIR No.ACCPP 6164 E (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by…

M/S. AJAY KUMAR GUPTA (HUF),DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 5775/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year:

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 139(5)Section 154Section 234BSection 40Section 80C

…IT(A) in the impugned order. This issue has been settled by Hon’ble jurisdictional 9 High Court in Coal India Ltd. vs. M/s. Continental & Eastern Agency (RFA) OS 37/2003 dated 14.12.2011, where it has been held as under : “26. In the case reported as (1967) 66 ITR 613 (SC) Ram Laxman Sugar Mills v. Commissioner of Income-Tax, U.P. & Ors. the Hon"ble Supreme Court has categorically held that it is open to the manager of a joint Hindu Family as representing the family to agree to become a partner with another - person. The partnership agreement in that case is between the manager and the other person and by the p…

DCIT, ROURKELA vs. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 142/CTK/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack31 Aug 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri D.Pati, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR
Section 133(6)Section 194H

…and in such form, and as, defined “persons” under the Income-tax Act u/s 2(15) are / perfectly capable of carrying out business and/or commercial transactions. There are no physical/legal infirmities in this regard. In the case of Ram Laxman Sugar Mills-v-CIT 66 ITR 613 SC, it has been held that A Hindu undivided family is undoubtedly a "person" within the meaning of the Indian Income-tax Act. In various cases that indicate that the Honourable Courts have upheld that HUFs can earn commission income, the following may be considered. Where the karta is a partner representing the HUF in a firm and salary or commissi…

DCIT, COIMBATORE vs. AQUA SUB ENGINEERING, COIMBATORE

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue as well as the cross-objections of the assessees are dismissed

ITA 1959/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Feb 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1958/Mds/2016 & C.O. No.111/Mds/2016 (In I.T.A. No. 1958/Mds/2016) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sunder Rao, CIT
Section 185(1)(a)Section 40

…1 and also that of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ishwar Bhuvan Hindu Hotel v. CIT (2006) 281 ITR 139. The CIT(Appeals) was appreciative of the contention taken by the assessees. According to him, in the case of Ram Laxman Sugar Mills v. CIT (1967) 66 ITR 613, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that the karta of a HUF could enter into an agreement of partnership with another undivided family member or stranger. Further, according to him, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rashik Lal & Co. (supra) clearly held that though a HUF could never be a partner of a partnership firm, if a person nominated by…

DCIT, COIMBATORE vs. AQUA PUMP INDUSTRIES, COIMBATORE

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue as well as the cross-objections of the assessees are dismissed

ITA 1958/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Feb 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1958/Mds/2016 & C.O. No.111/Mds/2016 (In I.T.A. No. 1958/Mds/2016) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sunder Rao, CIT
Section 185(1)(a)Section 40

…1 and also that of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ishwar Bhuvan Hindu Hotel v. CIT (2006) 281 ITR 139. The CIT(Appeals) was appreciative of the contention taken by the assessees. According to him, in the case of Ram Laxman Sugar Mills v. CIT (1967) 66 ITR 613, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that the karta of a HUF could enter into an agreement of partnership with another undivided family member or stranger. Further, according to him, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rashik Lal & Co. (supra) clearly held that though a HUF could never be a partner of a partnership firm, if a person nominated by…

Ram Laxman Sugar Mills v. CIT (66 ITR 613) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax