9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (5) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inion are as follows : " (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the order passed by the Income-tax Officer under section 184(7) of the Income-tax Act was appealable before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner under section 246 of the Act ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtnership. A deed of dissolution was executed on January 9, 1973. Mr. Bhattacharjee received Rs. 40,000 ad hoc and gave up his interest in the firm. It will thus be seen that on and from January 9, 1973, there was no partnership. Only one of the partners remained. It is patent, therefore, that the constitution of the firm underwent a change on and from January 9, 1973. This clearly disentitles the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4 of the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, but since the question has been framed in very wide terms, the question embraces this aspect of the matter as well. In that view of the matter, we are of the view that the Appellate Tribunal was not correct in holding that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was right in giving direction to the Income-tax Officer to consider the contention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Appellate Tribunal was not correct in holding that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was right in giving direction to the Income-tax Officer to consider the contention of the assessee and to pass a fresh order in regard to the granting of continuation of registration. For the reasons stated above, the first question is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The secon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
