Partnership deed
This query is : Resolved
Querist : Anonymous
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist)
07 November 2015
Dear Expert,
Please help its urgent
there is one client who is running coaching classes in Partnership it is located in mumbai . but the deed is not registered it is only notarized.the firm also have its PAN Card and they never filled return it is 8 years old firm. now they want to get it registered and also want to file returns. Now is it advisable to register it now by making fresh deed or to register it from the date which is mentioned in its old deed by paying Penalty for each month of delay.
Please help its urgent
there is one client who is running coaching classes in Partnership it is located in mumbai . but the deed is not registered it is only notarized.the firm also have its PAN Card and they never filled return it is 8 years old firm. now they want to get it registered and also want to file returns. Now is it advisable to register it now by making fresh deed or to register it from the date which is mentioned in its old deed by paying Penalty for each month of delay.
07 November 2015
My Advise is geting fresh deed and register the present date.
and filing of Income Tax Return in the firm name is Available FY 2012-13,2013-14.2014-15 .
and filing of Income Tax Return in the firm name is Available FY 2012-13,2013-14.2014-15 .
Message likes :
1 times
07 November 2015
You can get it registered now onwards also.
Registration of firm is NOT compulsory.
Registration of firm is NOT compulsory.
Message likes :
1 times
Querist : Anonymous
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist)
07 November 2015
In the state of maharashtra it is compulsory.
07 November 2015
The Supreme Court has quashed the law which debarred a partner of an unregistered firm in Maharashtra from filing a suit for dissolution of such a firm. The apex court also held as illegal the law prohibiting the partner to sue for accounts of the dissolved firm or realise properties of such dissolved firm, unless the duration of the firm was only six months or its capital was up to Rs 2,000.
"In our opinion sub-section 2A of section 69 (of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932) inserted by the Maharashtra Amendment violates Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 300A of the Constitution of India," said a bench comprising Justice Markandey Katju and Justice GS Singhvi.
"In our opinion sub-section 2A of section 69 (of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932) inserted by the Maharashtra Amendment violates Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 300A of the Constitution of India," said a bench comprising Justice Markandey Katju and Justice GS Singhvi.
Message likes :
1 times
You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now
Click here to login now
Similar Resolved Queries
Unanswered Queries
- REGARDING GST ON COMMERICIAL PROPERTY
- Is this income indian or foreign income?
- 15ca /15cb whose income tax login? remitter or nri seller's login?
- RCM applicability on Rent Paid by Registered Person to Unregistered Landlord for Residental Building
- Regarding Documentation & Compliances for Opening of Unit of Pvt Ltd.
- GST on export of services and Input Credit
- ITC temporary reversal and reclaim
- TDS U/S. 194NF
- Applicable TDS rate for sale of property in Nov 2024
- RCM INVOICING FROM NOV-2024
- MIS MATCH OF INVOICE NUMBER
- IGST Credit-Show cause notice issued-confusion
- Issue of gst e invoice
- How to adjusted advances given or receipt
- Foreign vendor without PAN unable to to register due to non receipt of OTP on foreign number ?
- 133(6) DIN INVALID format error - ->WHERE TO REPLY 133(6) notice?
- Query for dubts
- Regarding einvoice taken on nil rated sales
- Strategical investment in Public listed company
- CASE INTIMATION OF LIABILITY UNDER SECTION 73(5)(Rule 142(1A)
Trending Online Classes
CAclubindia
