9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (7) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no deed was drawn up on that date. By an instrument dt. 29th July, 1976 by which time Sudhir Walia had attained the age of majority as on and from 10th Apr, 1976 partnership was evidenced constituted by four of them. This partnership deed appears at pages1 and 2 of the assessee's paper book and inter alia describes that the partnership business shall be deemed to have commenced from 1st Apr, 1976. The L-2 licences had been obtained individually by Jagdish Chand Walia, Amarjit Walia and Harish Chand earlier on 18th Mar, 1976. 3. When the assessment for the year under appeal was taken up by the ITO he was satisfied that there existed a genuine firm carrying on business in liquor vends. It had filed application for registration in Form No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1976 effective from 1st Apr, 1976 did not contravene any of the provisions of the Punjab Excise Act or the rules made thereunder. He coming to the show cause notice issued by the CIT u/s 263 pointed out that the notice issued by the CIT is vague and not specific because the CIT has not pointed out what specific provisions of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 or the Punjab Liquor Licence Rules, 1956 had been violated by the assessee. His notice is in general terms and does not specifically point out the violated provisions of these laws. It was, therefore, contended that there was no case for him to interfere in the order of the ITO made u/s 185(1)(a) of the IT Act, 1961 because there was no violation of the rules and the ITO had made an order wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Monga in I.T.A. No. 575 of 1981 dt. 30th Apr, 1983, and since reported in (1983) 14 TLR 856 (Chd Bench) and the relevant provisions of Punjab Excise Act, 1914 and Punjab Liquor Licence Rules, 1956, we have come to the following conclusions: "19. It becomes very clear from what is stated above that under the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 and the Pb. Liquor Licences Rules, 1956, if the lecensee is a firm, it is prohibited from taking new partners without the approval of the concerned authorities. However, if the licensee is an individual, there does not appear to be any restriction of his discretion to form partnership with others. However, those admitted to such a partnership but not having a licence under the Act and the Rules mentioned supra, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he had found that the partner who was not holding a licence was in possession of the prohibited intoxicants and was dealing in the same in contravention of the Punjab Excise Act and the rules made thereunder. We do not find any such finding given by the CIT. In fact his notice which the ld. counsel for the assessee has rightly pointed out is not specifically pointing out which rule or which section of the Excise Act has been violated by the assessee. Apparently, therefore, the Commissioner proceeded to set aside the order of the ITO validly made merely on surmise that the Act and the rules had been violated by the assessee. It is clear that the CIT had not even applied the ratio of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment in the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
