9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 54X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ership deed on December 17, 1992, and requested for condonation of delay stating the reasons that the deed could not be filed on March 31, 1990 as it remained with the authorised representative - Whether, Tribunal is justified in law in allowing registration to the assessee-firm whereas the assessee-firm itself had filed a return in the status of URF, and this case was of fresh registration of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng registration to the assessee-firm whereas the assessee-firm itself had filed a return in the status of URF, and this case was of fresh registration of the firm?" The assessee-firm filed a return of income for the assessment year 1990-91 in the status of URF. During the course of assessment proceedings under section 143(3), the assessee filed an application for registration with the partnershi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sing Officer took the status of the assessee as URP simply on the technical ground that the requisite forms were not furnished in due time. He has contended that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) refusal to condone the delay in furnishing of requisite forms in due time and thereby confirming the refusal of registration is not justified. He has contended that the assessee-firm came i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments as contractor. He has cited in CIT v. Sitaram Bhagwandas [1976] 102 ITR 560 (Patna) and Kodan Das Kishan Das v. ITO [1980] 10 TTJ 80 (Jaipur). He has also contended that the provisions are directory and not mandatory. He has also contended that at the time of constitution of the firm the assessee had applied for income-tax clearance certificate to the Income-tax Officer and at that time also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, for condonation of delay in case the application allowing the partnership deed has not been filed along with the return filed. Mr. Sangeet Lodha has no dispute about the fact that the firm is a genuine firm and when the firm is genuine and reasons are there for delay, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order of the Tribunal. The appeal stands dismissed. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
