1968 (10) TMI 19

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... come-tax Act, 1922, sought by the assessee which is a firm in Hubli. There were four partners in the firm and in the opinion of the Tribunal, the instrument of partnership, on its interpretation, specified only the shares of the partners in the profit and not their shares in the losses. So, it reversed the order made by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and restored that made by the Income-tax .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... omes unnecessary. Our answer to the question should be in favour of the assessee since the enunciation made by this court in Sannappa v. Commissioner of Income-tax makes it clear that refusal of registration under section 26A is not possible in a case where the instrument of partnership specifies the individual shares of the partners although it does not specify the shares in the losses. The eluci .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X