| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2005 SLG 2390 2005 SLD 2390 (2005) 275 ITR 179 |
Madhya Pradesh High Court
WRIT PETITION Nos. 68 AND 69 OF 2001 FEBRUARY 25, 2003
ARUN MISHRA, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
WRIT PETITION Nos. 68 AND 69 OF 2001 FEBRUARY 25, 2003
ARUN MISHRA, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Dhannalal Gulabchand Sethi
v.
Income Tax Officer
Law:
Section:
Section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Return of income - Petitioner-firm was dissolved due to death of one of its partner - Subsequently, a new partnership deed was executed - Petitioner filed returns for old and new firm - As accounts were not closed on date of dissolution of firm and no separate accounts were maintained for two periods, Assessing Officer assessed petitioner-firm as AOP - Additional Commissioner, confirmed order of Assessing Officer - Whether it was incumbent upon Assessing Officer and Additional Commissioner to consider issue as to whether defects of failure to maintain separate account and its closure on date of dissolution was such which could not be allowed to be rectified within purview of section 139(9) - Held, yes - Whether since Additional Commissioner did not consider issue in terms of section 139(9), matter was to be reconsidered under section 144 - Held, yes FACTS The petitioner-firm was dissolved owing to the death of one of its partner. Subsequently, a new partnership deed was executed. The petitioner filed returns for the old firm and the new firm. The Assessing Officer found that the accounts were not closed on the date of dissolution of firm and no separate accounts were maintained for the two periods and, therefore, assessed the petitioner-firm as AOP. On application, the Additional Commissioner, issued a direction under section 144A and confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. On writ : HELD It is true that if there is failure to file the return as mandated under section 139(1) or revised return has not been filed under sub-sections (4) and (5) of section 139 and notice issued under section 143(2) has not been complied with or a notice under section 142(1) has not been complied with, the firm can be assessed as an AOP. However, the provision of section 139 is not attracted which is the provision for filing of the return. It was incumbent upon the Assessing Officer as well as the Addl. Commissioner to ponder on the issue whether the defects of failure to maintain separate account and to close the account on the date of dissolution was such, which could not be allowed to be rectified within the purview of section…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492