In partnership problems, the profit is divided in the ratio of capital multiplied by time. Taking capitals as 3k, 5k and 7k for A, B and C and times as 2, 4 and 6 years, their effective investments are 3k × 2 = 6k, 5k × 4 = 20k and 7k × 6 = 42k. The ratio 6:20:42 simplifies to 3:10:21. The sum of these parts is 34, so B’s share is (10/34) of ₹1,36,000, which equals ₹40,000.
Option A:
Option A is correct because the calculation (10/34) × 1,36,000 gives exactly ₹40,000, and using 3/34 and 21/34 for A and C yields the remaining profit. The three shares add up neatly to ₹1,36,000, confirming that the ratio of effective investments has been applied correctly. Hence, ₹40,000 accurately represents B’s entitlement.
Option B:
Option B, ₹38,000, would not correspond to the fraction 10/34 of the total profit. If we assign ₹38,000 to B, the remaining amount for A and C would not then be divisible in the ratio 3:21 without leaving a remainder or altering the initial capital-time structure. Therefore, ₹38,000 is inconsistent with the proportional rule.
Option C:
Option C, ₹48,000, would represent a larger share than warranted by the 10 parts out of 34. Using ₹48,000 for B implies that B’s effective contribution outweighs that of C more than the 10:21 ratio allows. This contradicts the original investment-time data, so ₹48,000 cannot be correct.
Option D:
Option D, ₹52,000, is even higher and would require B’s share to be close to or greater than C’s share, which is not supported by the ratio 3:10:21. The necessary rebalancing of the remaining profit would distort the intended proportions. As a result, ₹52,000 does not match the proportional distribution.
Comment Your Answer
Please login to comment your answer.
Sign In
Sign Up
Answers commented by others
No answers commented yet. Be the first to comment!