Commissioner of Income Tax vs Jai Narain Binodi Lal

Heard Sri A.N. Mahajan, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri Shakeel Ahmad, learned counsel for the respondent.

The following three questions have been referred for opinion

"1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was legally justified in confirming the Appellate Assistant Commissioners order deleting Rs. 10,000 which was taken by the Income Tax Officer as assessees income for the period from 3-11-1974 to 13-11-1974 ?

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in confirming the Appellate Assistant Commissioners order directing the Income Tax Officer to grant continuation of registration to firm ?

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was legally justified in holding that the matter of registration of the firm can be carried in an appeal filed against the Income Tax Officers order passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, when in fact no separate appeal was filed against refusal of Income Tax Officer to grant continuation of registration ?"

Briefly stated the facts are that one of the partners died on 2-11-1974. After the death of one of the partners the firm stands dissolved under the law and therefore a separate assessment was to be done after the death of the partner. This view has also been taken in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. EMPIRE ESTATE., .

In view of the above decision our answer to the above three questions is in affirmative and against the department. The reference is accordingly disposed of.

The parties shall, however, bear their own costs.