Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + SC Income Tax - 1956 (2) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1956 (2) TMI 2 - SC - Income TaxWhether Chhotelal and Bansilal were partners in the firm, which was constituted on 23rd August, 1940? Held that:- Whether the question is considered on the principles of Hindu law or on the provisions of the Excess Profits Tax Act, there was a change in the personnel of the firm on 17th October, 1944, and the matter falls within section 8(1) of the Act. The order of the Excess Profits Tax Officer dated 23rd December, 1946, refers in terms to the order dated 28th September, 1946, passed in the proceedings for assessment of income-tax on the appellant, and the deficiency of profits is worked out on the basis of the loss of ₹ 15,771 as ascertained therein. We see no substance in this contention, which must accordingly be rejected. On the facts as pleaded by the appellant, Chhotelal and Bansilal could not be regarded as partners in the old firm we may add that this contention does not appear to have been put forward before the Commissioner when notice was issued to the appellant under section 20 of the Act. If any such contention had been raised, it would have been open to the Commissioner to have taken action under section 19 of the Act. Appeal dismissed.
|