9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (3) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entitled to continuation of registration ? " In the assessment of the assessee, Ghosh & Sons, for the assessment year 1961-62, the Income-tax Officer had adopted the status as Hindu undivided family as against the status of registered firm claimed by the assessee. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, however, granted registration to the assessee which was confirmed by the Tribunal by the order dated June 1, 1970. The registration was allowed to the assessee till the assessment year 1967-68. In 1967, a receiver was appointed to run the business of the assessee in the suit instituted in the High Court being Suit No. 2619 of 1967 (Pannalal Ghose v. Smt Sarojini Ghosh). The receiver filed the returns for the assessment years 1968-69 and 196 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ration on the ground that the applications in Form No. 12 were signed by the receiver and not by the partners, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner proceeded on the footing that no business was carried on by the firm. The assessee went to the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that up to the assessment year 1967-68, registration was allowed to the assessee. The income assessed in both the said years included income from business. It cannot, therefore, be said that the assessee carried on no business during the relevant previous years. But for the defect in the application forms the assessee was entitled to the continuation of registration. The Tribunal held that under section 185(3) of the Act, the Income-tax Officer should have pointed out the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uring the relevant previous years. However, the receiver was not competent to apply for continuation of registration in Form No. 12. Section 184(7) of the Act provides that where registration is granted to any firm for any assessment year, it shall have effect for every subsequent assessment year if the conditions prescribed therein are satisfied. One of the conditions is that a declaration in the prescribed form and in the prescribed manner has to be filed before the Income-tax Officer. Such declaration is to the effect that there is no change in the constitution of the firm or the shares of the partners as evidenced by the instrument of partnership on the basis of which the registration was granted. Rule 24 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e defect in the declaration within a period of one month from the date of such intimation; and if the defect is not rectified within that period, the Income-tax Officer shall, by order in writing, declare that the registration granted to the firm shall not have effect for the relevant assessment year. " The Income-tax Officer, therefore, should have intimated the defect to the firm and given it an opportunity to rectify the defect in the declaration filed by the receiver. In spite of the opportunity given, if the defect is not rectified within the specified time, the Income-tax Officer will then be empowered to declare that the registration granted to the firm shall not have any effect for the relevant assessment years. Having regard to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
