TMI Blog1974 (9) TMI 3X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act ? " The reference arises out of the assessment for the assessment year 1964-65. It appears that the assessee-firm was constituted under a deed of partnership dated August 28, 1962. For the assessment year 1963-64, the very first year when the firm became eligible for registration under the Income-tax Act, 1961, the registration was granted to it. One of the partners died on March 21, 1963, and a new deed of partnership was executed on June 18, 1963, and there was a fresh application for registration of the firm for the assessment year 1964-65. The registration was allowed by the Income-tax Officer by his order dated May 22, 1968. For the next year, that is to say, assessment year 1965-66, the assessee filed a declaration in Form ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... visions of the Act. Section 184 of the Act deals with the registration of a firm and sub-section (4) of section 184 provides that the application for registration of a firm has to be made before the end of the previous year for the assessment year in respect of which registration is sought. The proviso to the said sub-section stipulates that the Income-tax Officer might entertain an application made after the end of the previous year if he was satisfied that the firm was prevented by sufficient cause from making the application before the end of the previous year. The section deals with certain conditions required for making an application for registration and certain conditions to be fulfilled before the firm could merit registration by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the proviso to sub-section (7) of section 184 of the Act. It was urged that the expression " application " should be liberally construed and the declaration in the prescribed form giving the registered firm right to continue the registered status from year to year should be treated really as an application for continuance of the registered status of the firm and as such should be given the parity of treatment under sub-section (2) of section 185 of the Act. In the alternative, counsel for the assessee submitted that on a proper reading of the sub-sections notice was required to be given. Lastly, counsel for the assessee submitted that even if the notice was not required to be given by the express provisions of the statute, on the grounds of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee to be provided with a notice. It is clear that section 185 specifically deals with all application and not with any declaration form or the consequence of non-submission of declaration form. A declaration form which is required to be given under clause (ii) of the proviso to subsection (7) of section 184 is not an application spoken of in section 185(2) of the Act. In this connection, we may notice incidentally that the view we are taking in this case is in consonance with the decisions in the case of Harnandrai Badridas v. Commissioner of Income-ax [1969] 71 ITR 339 (Cal), Pannalal Ramkumar and Co. v. Income-tax Officer [1970] 75 ITR 309 (Mad) ; and Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ice Suppliers Corporation [1967] 64 ITR 195 (Punj). T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
