TMI Blog1986 (1) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the death of Shrimati Hari Bai (partner) on September 22, 1977, the firm stood dissolved and, therefore, two separate assessments for the two different periods should have been made ?" Chhaganlal, Ram Chandra, Kailashchandra, Sureshchandra and Smt. Hari Bai constituted a partnership under a deed dated July 12, 1972. Registration was granted to the firm in respect of the assessment year 1973-74 and this registration continued up to the assessment year 1977-78. One of the partners, Smt. Hari Bai, died on September 22, 1977. The firm stood automatically dissolved on her death. After the death of Smt. Hari Bai, the remaining four partners admitted two new partners and a new partnership deed was executed on October 5, 1977. This new partners ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the death of a partner unless the dissolution is saved by contrary agreement. Admittedly, there is no contrary agreement in the deed dated July 12, 1972, that the firm will be dissolved on the death of a partner. Thus, under section 42, the firm will stand dissolved on the death of Smt. Hari Bai. For these reasons, we agree with the conclusion of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, that on the fact of the case, the Income-tax Officer should have made two assessments for the two different periods. The appeal is dismissed. " An application was made under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (No. XLIII of 1961) (for short "the Act"), for referring three questions, which have been mentioned in the statement of the case. The Tribunal h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Agencies [1984] 148 ITR 94 (Raj), Addl. CIT v. Emery Stone Manufacturing Co. [1985] 153 ITR 150 (Raj), Surana Co. 's case [1985] 153 ITR 190 (Raj) and Pratap Chitrapat's case [1987] 163 ITR 559 (Raj), we are of the opinion that the Tribunal rightly held that on the death of Smt. Hari Bai, partner, on September 22, 1977, the firm stood dissolved and, therefore, the Income-tax Officer should have made two separate assessments regarding the periods : (i) up to September 22, 1977, and (ii) from September 23, 1977, to March 31, 1978, in respect of the assessment year 1978-79. The question referred by the Tribunal is answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. There will be no order as to costs in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
