9911796707
TMI Blog1972 (1) TMI 42X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irm (Messrs. Shahzada Nand and Sons, Putlighar, Amritsar). Initially this was a Hindu undivided family concern. Its chief business was the selling agency of Oriental Carpets Manufacturers Private Ltd., Amritsar. The joint Hindu family consisted of Sahib Dyal, karta, and his three Sons, Chaman Lal, Madan Gopal and Harbans Lal. Harbans Lal was a minor. On the 31st March, 1945, this undivided family disrupted by reason of a partition. On 1st April, 1945, the outgoing members of the Hindu undivided family entered into a partnership to carry on the business of the selling agency which the Hindu undivided family was carrying on. The partners were Chaman Lal, Madan Gopal, Harbans Lal (minor), through the guardianship of Sahib Dyal and Shahzada Nan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l. This the Income-tax Officer did on the ground that the share of profits given to Shahzada Nand Trust was not in accordance with the terms of the partnership deed. A further ground was also taken in the matter of refusal of renewal of registration that the element of mutual agency of partnership was lacking and that the interest had not been paid on the capital invested by the four partners. The Income-tax Officer, while coming to the conclusion that the share of the profits of Shahzada Nand Trust was not according to the deed of partnership, observed as follows : " As per revised return the total income of the assessee for the year under consideration is Rs. 2,00,006. This includes interest of Rs. 2,699 allowed to M/s. Shahzada Nand Ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lication under section 66(1) of the 1922 Act, asking the Tribunal to refer the question of law, namely, " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the income-tax authorities had erred in refusing renewal of registration to the firm under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ? This application was refused by the Tribunal. The department then moved this court under section 66(2) asking that mandamus should issue to the Tribunal to refer the aforesaid question of law for the opinion of the court. This application was allowed and that is how the question of law has been referred for the opinion of this court. When the matter was posted before us for decision it trans ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
