1. The questions propounded are:

(a) Whether on the facts of this case the assessee firm did succeed to the business of the individual partners within the meaning of Section 26(2) of the Indian Income Tax Act? and

(b) whether a firm constituted under a registered deed of partnership of which one member is a firm is not entitled to be registered as a firm for the purpose of Income Tax merely because while specifying the individual share of the profits and losses the instrument does not specify the shares inter se of the partner firm.

2. Prior to the 31st August, 1933, a firm called M.K. Naicker & Sons was supplying labour to the Madras Port Trust under a contract which expired on the 31st August, 1933, and M. Raju Naicker and R. Govindarajulu Naicker in partnership had a similar contract with the Madras Port Trust which also expired on the same date. The labour under the contract was supplied by the former partnership M.K. Naicker & Sons to two godowns belonging to the Madras Port Trust and by the latter partners to two other godowns also belonging to the Madras Port Trust. Until 1933-1934 the family represented by M.K. Naicker & Sons which was an undivided family and the firm