9911796707
TMI Blog1933 (7) TMI 12X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esses had succeeded to the N. N. family business." The question is not happily worded, the real question being whether upon the facts as found, the Income-tax Officer correctly held that the assessee had" succeeded" to the joint family business carried on under the vilasam of N.N. The material facts are as follows: An undivided Hindu joint family consisting of N.N. Nachiappa Chetty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the four other members of the family should buy out N.S.M. by giving him credit in the partition for one fifth of the value of the rice-mill. There can be no doubt and the assessee do not dispute it, that the four members of the family who purchased the share of N.S.M. in the rice mill and continued to carry on the ricemilling business as their own, in the manner that theretofore had obtained, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re was a "succession" to the money-lending business of the undivided joint family within Section 26(2), Income-tax Act. In my opinion it is manifest that there was not a "succession" within Section 26(2) of the Act. In order that a person should be held to have "succeeded"another person in carrying on a business, profession or vocation, it is necessary that the person ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... andson did not carry on or take over from the joint family the whole of the business that had been carried on by the joint family, and also that for three months prior to the partition the business carried on by the Hindu joint family had been discontinued: Bell v. National Provincial Bank of England; Stockham v. Wallasey Urban District Council; Western India Turf Club, Ltd. v. Commissioner of Inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
