9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Refusal of registration to the Appellant firm under section 185 for the assessment year 1982-83. Analysis: The judgment revolves around the refusal of registration to the Appellant firm under section 185 for the assessment year 1982-83. The primary ground for refusal, as stated in the order of the assessing officer, was the existence of an agreement with another company before the firm's inception and alleged improper responses by one of the partners during examination. The assessing officer highlighted discrepancies related to the timing of the agreement, capital introduction, and business activities. However, it was later clarified that the firm was indeed incepted before the agreement, and the capital contributions of the partners were duly accounted for. The examination of the partner in question revealed satisfactory responses to most queries, indicating her genuine involvement in the firm. The assessing officer also raised concerns about the non-appearance of the other partner for examination. However, a detailed analysis of the assessment record showed that the assessing officer had previously accepted the partners' individual assessments, indicating their genuine involvement in the firm. The capital contributions of both partners were traced back to known sources, further supporting their authenticity. Additionally, the joint bank accounts of the partners were highlighted as evidence of their association with the firm. Moreover, the documentation provided, including the account details showing money transfers and capital investments, corroborated the partners' involvement in the firm. The tribunal found no justifiable reason in the lower authorities' decisions to deny registration to the firm under section 185(1). Consequently, the tribunal directed that the firm be granted the status of a registered firm under section 185(1)(a), thereby allowing the appeal against the refusal of registration.
|
