9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Interpretation of section 187(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 regarding change in the constitution of a firm. 2. Whether one assessment or two separate assessments should be made for a partnership firm after a change in its constitution due to the death of a partner. Analysis: The case involved a partnership firm constituted by a deed of partnership on January 1, 1976, with five partners, one of whom died on March 20, 1976. The firm was reconstituted on April 14, 1976, after the partner's death. The main issue was whether this change in the firm's constitution required one assessment for the entire period or two separate assessments. The Income-tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) concluded that only one assessment was needed. However, the Tribunal directed two assessments to be made, which the Revenue challenged. The Tribunal correctly found that the firm was not dissolved due to the partner's death, as per the partnership deed's terms. Therefore, it was considered a change in the firm's constitution under section 187(2) of the Act. The Tribunal's decision to make two assessments was deemed inconsistent with this finding. Section 187 mandates lumping the income for both periods together for a single assessment, as opposed to section 188, which requires separate assessments. The proviso in section 187(2) inserted by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1984, does not apply to cases where the firm is not dissolved due to a contract to the contrary in the partnership deed. As a result, the High Court ruled in favor of the Revenue, stating that the Tribunal erred in directing two separate assessments. The decision was based on the firm's continuity despite the partner's death and the absence of dissolution as per the partnership deed. The court emphasized that in cases falling under section 187(2), only one assessment should be made for the entire period, as the proviso does not apply in situations where the firm remains intact due to contractual terms.
|
