9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (11) TMI 106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of the ITO by treating the firm as unregistered firm, although the assessment of the partners have been completed by taking their share of profits in the firm as registered firm is illegal, arbitrary, unwarranted, uncalled for and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. "The action of the ld. AAC in not annuling the assessment order of the firm is illegal, arbitrary unwarranted, u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he case of Laxmichand Hirjibhai vs. CIT (1981) 21 CTR (Guj) 181 : (1981) 128 ITR 747 (Guj), the Patna High Court in the case of CIT vs. Pure Nichitpur Colliery Co. (1975) 101 ITR 79 (Pat) and Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Blue Mountain Engg. Corpn. reported in (1978) TLR 547 (Mad). Reference was also made to certain other decisions ofBombayand Calcutta High Court. The AAC, however, was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... partners Shri Bishan Dass was without mentioning this fact. It was submitted that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Murlidhar Jhawar and the other cases relied before the AAC, the status of the firm could not be an unregistered firm. According to the ld. counsel the ITO has opted to assess the partners instead of the firm and there could not be a double assessment on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accordance with the provisions of law. Their Lordships of Delhi High Court held that the decision in the case of CIT vs. Murlidhar Jhawar (1966) 60 ITR 95 (SC) was not applicable under the new Act. They dissented from the decision of the Andhra Predesh High Court in the case of Ch. Atchaiah vs. ITO (1979) 116 ITR 675 (AP). In view of the above, the legal contentions raised by the assessee, the fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pears that a letter dt.28th March, 1983is on record stating before the ITO that Form No. 12 was being filed. This letter is without any initial or seal of the office and it is known on which date it was actually filed. However, it is clear that it was not filed prior to the making of the assessment. In view of this position, we decline to takeup this declaration for consideration. In fact this iss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
