9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (3) TMI 20X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year 1968-69 ?" The reference is under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The dispute is about the correctness of the year of accounting in which the share of profit of a partnership firm of which the assessee is a member is included. In the statement of case, the facts are stated as under : "The assessment year involved is 1968-69. The assessee is a partner of Credit Transactors. The assessee maintained accounts and the accounting period relevant to the assessment year 1968-69 ended on December 31, 1967. The previous year of Credit Transactors relevant to the assessment year 1967-68 ended on April 14, 1967. In the first assessment for the assessment year 1967-68, the assessee's share of profit was allocated at Rs. 53,697. In h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the previous year must be the financial year preceding the assessment year and that as the firm's previous year ended on April 14, 1967, after March 31, 1967, the assessee's share income from the firm for that period could not be included in the assessee's assessment for the assessment year 1967-68 and that it was to be included in the assessment year 1968-69. It was urged by counsel for the assessee before the Tribunal that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner erred in taking a different assessment year for the assessee from that of the firm. According to him, the object of the provision of section 3(1)(f) was to have the same assessment year both for a partner and the firm in respect of the same accounting period so that the share ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... antially the same. The facts in the case of CIT v. M. S. Sheikh Rowther [1962] 46 ITR 259 (Ker) were that the accounting period of the firm ended on April 30, 1958. The assessee partner had some other sources of income for which the accounting year ended on March 31, 1958. It was held that the share of profit from the firm could not be assessed in the hands of the partner in the assessment year 1958-59. In our view, this decision applies to the facts of the case. We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. On behalf of the assessee, our attention has been drawn to section 3 where the previous year has been defined. It has been contended that under section 3(1)(c), the court has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
