9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (10) TMI 16X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... awala & Co. It carries on business in jaggery and acts as commission agents. It was first constituted under a deed of partnership executed in October, 1949. From time to time, the constitution of the firm has undergone various changes. We are concerned with the two partnership deeds, one dated October 30, 1963, and another dated March 14, 1968. The first of the two deeds, that is the one of 1963, records that six persons named therein were carrying on business in partnership of whom one Shamji retired on October 17, 1963 (which is the end of S. Y.). The deed further records that the five continuing partners have agreed to continue the business in the very name and style and their shares in the profits and losses are set out in clause 6 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal to the Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, it was contended on behalf of the assessee that there was a dissolution of the firm on the death of Ramji and no question of a change in the constitution. On the other hand, on behalf of the Revenue, it was contended that various circumstances showed that the firm had continued with the same business with the same goodwill and with the same assets and liabilities after the death of Ramji Keshavji. These circumstances were, according to the arguments of the departmental representative, that the profit and loss account was not made up and the balance-sheet was not struck on the death of the said partner. No deed of dissolution was executed among the surviving partners evidencing the factum of disso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of these two new partners. The short question is whether there has been succession of one firm by another or a mere change in the constitution of the firm covered by the provisions contained in s. 187 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Section 187 provides that where it is found that a mere change has occurred in the constitution of a firm, the assessment is to be made on the firm as constituted at the time of making the assessment. On the other hand, where a firm has been succeeded by another firm and the case is one not covered by s. 187, separate assessments are required to be made on the predecessor firm and the successor firm. In our opinion, the legal position will have to be ascertained with reference to the provisions of the Indian Partn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not result in the dissolution of the firm, The court must not readily infer that death of a partner would not result in the dissolution unless the facts and circumstances of the case are such as to clearly indicate that such an inference must be drawn. If the question is simply posed in this manner, it is not possible to hold, in the instant case, that such an inference was required to be drawn. Merely because the surviving partners choose to carry on the business without providing for the share in the assets and profits of the deceased partner would not justify such an inference being drawn. Similarly, the fact that one of the sons of the deceased partner had been inducted as a partner though given a lesser share would not seem to carry th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
