| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1999 SLG 305 1999 SLD 305 1999 PTD 2150 (1997) 226 ITR 905 |
Allahabad High Court
Income-tax Reference No. 223 of 1980, decision dated: 1st July, 1996
B. M. LAL AND B. DIKSHIT, JJ
R. K. Agarwal for the Commissioner
Income-tax Reference No. 223 of 1980, decision dated: 1st July, 1996
B. M. LAL AND B. DIKSHIT, JJ
R. K. Agarwal for the Commissioner
COMMISSIONER OF IncomE tax
VS
LALJI SINGH GOVIND SINGH
Law: Income Tax Act, 1961
Section: 184(4),185,246
Income-tax----Firm---Registration---Appeal---Refusal of registration to firm---Order under S.184(4) resulting in refusal of registration under S.185 is appealable-¬Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss.184(4), 185 & 246. An order passed under section 184(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, resulting in refusal of registration to a firm under section 185 is appealable. C.I.T. v. Ashoka Engineering Co. (1992) 194 ITR 645(SC) fol. JUDGMENT This is a reference under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), and the following questions of law have been referred to this Court: "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the order passed by the Income-tax Officer was one under section 185 and not under section 184(4)? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct is holding that an appeal could be filed against an order under section 184(4) of the Income-tax Act?" The assessee-firm carried on whole sale cloth business. The firm came into existence by a deed of partnership dated October 24, 1965, consisting of four partners. The firm was assessed as a registered firm. However, it appears that some changes had taken place in the firm on account of the death of one of the partners and, therefore, complying with the provisions of subsection (4) of section 184 of the Act the firm was obliged to furnish a certified copy of the revised partnership deed alongwith the return of income for the assessment year relevant to such previous year, but the same had not been complied with well within the period of limitation stipulated in the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. However, the same was filed subsequently alongwith an application for condonation of delay. Since the application was not made in accordance with the provisions of subsection (4) of section 184 of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder within the period of limitation, the application was rejected against which an appeal was filed. The First Appellate Authority held that a bare perusal of subsection…
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