Skip to main content

What is a proprietorship firm?

What is a proprietorship?
A sole proprietorship is a type of unregistered business entity that is owned, managed and controlled by one person. Sole proprietorship is the most common type of business in India and it is used by most micro and small businesses operating in the unorganised sectors.

Proprietorships are simple to start and have minimal regulatory compliance requirements for operating. This entity is ideal for entrepreneurs who are getting into business for the first time and for small businesses with few clients.

Who is a proprietor?
The owner of a sole proprietorship business in India is called a proprietor. It cannot be a corporate or legal entity. The proprietor and the proprietorship are considered to be the same entity legally.

The PAN and other documents of the proprietor are the basis for obtaining all other business registrations and licenses. In case of any issues of liability in the business, the proprietor is held personally liable for it.

Advantages
Ease of setup- The entrepreneur can start operations and receive payments from clients as no registrations are required to start a proprietorship.
Ease of compliance- The other advantage of a Proprietorship is that it requires no additional compliance in most cases. The PAN of the proprietor and proprietorship are one and the same. Hence in most cases, only income tax return in Form ITR-3 must be filed every year.
Ease of dissolution- The proprietor does not have to particularly wind up the company incase he wants to cease operations. This saves a lot of time and effort.
Disadvantages
Liability protection: A sole proprietorship does not provide the proprietor with limited liability protection. So the proprietor would be held personally liable in case of any loss or liability.
Transferability: Any license or registration obtained in the name of the proprietorship cannot be transferred to any other person or entity.
Lifespan: The existence of the sole proprietorship is tied to the proprietor hence it would cease to exist with the proprietor.
Fundraising: A proprietorship cannot raise equity funds from angel investors, venture capital firms or PE funds. Banks also tend to restrictions on the amount of credit they can lend.
Due to the disadvantages mentioned above, this registration will be suitable only for small businesses and the unorganised sector with a limited period of existence.

Disadvantages
Key registrations
Each proprietorship differs in terms of the functions, clientele and the mode of operations. Hence, a couple of the registrations mentioned below will be applicable.

1
MSME registration
MSME or Udyog Aadhaar registration can be obtained in the name of the business to establish that the sole proprietorship is registered with the Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises.

2
TAN registration
TAN registration must be obtained for the proprietor from the income tax department if the proprietor is making salary payments wherein TDS deduction is required.

3
GST registration
GST registration must be obtained if the proprietor is selling goods or services that cross the GST turnover threshold limit for registration. In most states, GST registration is required for service providers having annual revenue of more than Rs.20 lakhs and in case of traders - annual revenue of more than Rs.40 lakhs.

4
Import Export code
Import Export Code or IE code can be obtained from the DGFT in the name of the business - in case of a proprietorship business undertaking export and/or import of goods into India.

5
FSSAI registration
In case the proprietorship is involved in the selling of food products or handling of food products, FSSAI registration must be obtained from the Food Safety and Standard Authority of India in the name of the proprietor.

6
Current account
A current account can be opened for a sole proprietorship through us from various banks in India. We offer exclusive partnerships through which zero-balance current accounts can be opened. It is recommended that GST registration be obtained for the same.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

POONAM VERMA VS. ASHWIN PATEL & ORS (10 MAY, 1996)

     POONAM VERMA VS. ASHWIN PATEL & ORS (10 MAY, 1996) INTRODUCTION The medical profession is perhaps the noblest profession among any remaining professions in India. For a patient, the specialist resembles God. What's more, God is trustworthy. In any case, that is the patient's opinion. As a general rule, doctors are individuals. Furthermore, to fail is human. Doctors might submit a slip-up. Doctors might be careless. The care staff might be imprudent. Two demonstrations of carelessness might bring about a lot more pressing issue. It very well might be because of gross carelessness. The sky is the limit. In such a situation, it is basic to figure out who was careless, and under what conditions. For this situation, the Supreme Court separated carelessness, impulsiveness, and foolishness. An individual is supposed to be a careless individual when he/she unintentionally submits a demonstration of exclusion and disregards a positive obligation that he/she ought to ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur ...
1 comment
Read more

Effects of Non-Registration

 Effects of Non-Registration The Companies Act, 2013 evidently highlights that the main essential for any organization to turn into a company is to get itself registered. A company cannot come into existence until it gets registered. But no such obligation has been imposed for firms by the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. If a firm is not registered it does not cease to be called as a firm, it still exists in the eyes law. Certainly, such a big advantage is not absolute but is subjected to a lot of limitations which we will study further. Non-registration of a firm simply means that the business skips the formalities of incorporation and ceases to exist in the eyes of the law. section 58 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 deals with the procedure of incorporation. Likewise, the meaning of non-registration is the exact opposite of registration, meaning when a firm does not go through the procedure of incorporation or start carrying on activities without getting registered. Effects of ...
Post a Comment
Read more