9911796707
TMI Blog1972 (6) TMI 8X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the question as to the genuineness of the partnership and considering the document in the light of its said finding - - - - - Dated:- 29-6-1972 - Judge(s) : G. RAMANUJAM., V. RAMASWAMY. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by RAMANUJAM J.-The question referred to us for our decision by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is as follows : "Whether the refusal to grant registration to the assessee-firm on the basis of the document dated October 1, 1961, was justified ? " The assessee, claiming to be a partnership firm, applied for registration under section 184 of the Act and claimed that the partnership has been formed with effect from October 1, 1961, and produced t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o void. The Income-tax Officer also took the view that the partnership could not have been genuine having regard to some other circumstances also. In that view the Income-tax Officer refused to register the firm for the purposes of the Income-tax Act. There was an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner also held that the document dated October 1, 1961, written on the stamp papers bearing date October 20, 1961, was ab initio void and that as there is no valid partnership deed in writing, the registration has rightly been refused by the Income-tax Officer. He, however, did not go into the question as to whether a partnership was genuinely constituted or not. On appeal, the Appellate Tribunal also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... will become effective only from October 20, 1961, when it was executed by the parties after the document has been written on the stamp papers. The Tribunal, therefore, is not right in holding that the document itself is invalid for the reason that the date of the document precedes the purchase of the stamp papers. As already stated this question may be relevant for finding out the genuineness or otherwise of the partnership and this question has not been touched by the Tribunal on the view that the document itself is invalid. The Tribunal also did not consider that the rectification deed dated January 19, 1965, could cure the defect in the document dated October 1, 1961. In our view, the Tribunal should have gone into the question as to wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
