9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Validity of reopening the assessment for the assessment year 1974-75. 2. Whether two separate assessments should be made for the old and new firm after the death of a partner. Analysis: 1. The Tribunal made a reference regarding the validity of reopening the assessment for the assessment year 1974-75. The Income-tax Officer had initially passed two separate assessment orders for the old and new firms after considering the relevant partnership deeds. However, the assessment was later reopened under section 147(b) based on an internal audit note suggesting a different interpretation. The Tribunal found this to be a change of opinion by the Assessing Officer, making the reopening invalid. The Tribunal also ruled in favor of the assessee on the merits, citing the decision in Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT [1979] 119 ITR 996. 2. The second issue revolved around whether two separate assessments should be made for the old and new firm following the death of a partner. The original partnership deed stated that the firm was a partnership at will, and under the Indian Partnership Act, in the absence of a contract, the firm would dissolve upon the death of a partner. The Tribunal analyzed the subsequent partnership deed executed after the death of a partner, which explicitly stated that the firm would not dissolve upon the death of a partner. The Tribunal referred to the decision in Kaithari Lungi Stores v. CIT [1976] 104 ITR 160, emphasizing that a change in the constitution of a firm is distinct from dissolution. The Tribunal concluded that the old partnership dissolved upon the partner's death, and a new partnership was formed, justifying two separate assessments. This decision aligned with the Supreme Court ruling in CIT v. Empire Estate [1996] 218 ITR 355. In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that the old partnership dissolved upon the partner's death, leading to the formation of a new partnership that warranted two separate assessments. The Court disposed of the tax case in favor of the assessee, emphasizing that even if the first question regarding the validity of reopening the assessment was answered in favor of the Revenue, it would not impact the overall decision.
|
