9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (7) TMI 113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... question : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in directing that there should be two separate assessments for the period April 1, 1974, to October 22, 1974, and the other for the period October 23, 1974, to March 31, 1975, and not one for the entire period from April 1, 1974, to March 31, 1975 ?" The facts of the case, in brief, are as under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nor any intimation was sent with regard to the change in the constitution of the firm to the Registrar of Firms. The bank was, of course, informed that instead of four partners earlier, there were now three partners in the firm. The old bank account was, however, not closed and it continued to be operated as earlier by the new firm also. On appeal, the appellate authority, Commissioner, did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the firm in terms of section 187(2) and that, therefore, the assessment should be made in terms of sub-section (2) of section 187 and section 188 had no application to it is concerned, it is correct. Taking into account the provisions of clause of the aforesaid partnership deed, it has to be held that, due to the death of a partner, Smt. Shani Rai, the firm did not dissolve, rather it continue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was that there was no dissolution. There was only reconstitution. This finding was unchallenged. Hence, the same partnership-firm will be deemed to continue in spite of its reconstitution in 1964. The Income-tax Act clothes the firm with a distinct assessable entity apart from its partners and under this Act, on reconstitution of a firm the personality of the firm does not change". This Full Bench ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
