Satyanarayana Rao, J.-The only question that has been referred to us by the Appellate Tribunal under section 66(1) of the Act is whether in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the partnership deed cannot be registered.

One V. M. Narayanaswami Mudaliar carried on business in handloom cloth and piece goods. In respect of this business, he was assessed as the kartha of an undivided Hindu family upto the assessment year 1941-42, In 1942 he died leaving six minor sons and a widow. During the assessment years 1942-43, and 1943-44, the income was assessed on the basis of the income of an undivided Hindu family represented by the widow, Radha Ammal. The assessment years with which we are now concerned is the year 1944-45 and the accounting year is the year ending 16th November, 1943. During the accounting year the widow entered into two partnerships in respect of the two heads of business with two different persons. One was with one Arumugha Mudaliar who was an old clerk of the firm and concerned the handloom business. In respect of piece goods business, she entered into partnership with one Govindaraja Mudaliar. We are now concerned only with the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document