SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1973 Supreme(Kar) 183

K.J.SHETTY, GOVINDA BHAT
KARUPAKULA SURYANARAYANA SETTY – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – Respondent


Advocates:
K.SRINIVASAN, S.R.RAJASEKHARAMURTHY

GOVINDA BHAT, CJ.

( 1 ) THE Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench has stated a case and referred under S. 256 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the 'act') the following question of law for the opinion of this Court. " Whether on the facts and circumsatnqes of the Assessee's case when there was a change in the constitution of the Assessee firm the appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that only one assessment should be made. "

( 2 ) THE assessee is a partnership firm carrying on business in the manufacture of Agarbatties. The assessment year is 1966-67 for which the relevant previous year is the year ended 31-3-1966. There was a change in the constitution of the firm on 1-9-1965. Before the said date there were six partners in the firm. Thirteen more partners were introduced into the firm with effect from 1-9-1965.

( 3 ) THE, assessee filed a return on 1-8-1966 declaring an income of rs. 1,12,628. However, the said return was revised and two returns were filed in 31-10-1966; one return was for the period from 1-9-1965 to 31-3-1966. The contention of the assessee was that a new firm was constituted with effect from 1-9-1965 and therefore, for th










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top