Beasley, C.J.

1. The question referred to us is whether on the facts of this case the sum of Rs. 38,305 is a receipt of capital or of profit assessable under Section 4 (2), Income Tax Act. The petitioner was a partner in the S.P.K.A.A.M. Firm in Colombo. He retired from that firm; and an account was taken of the capital and of the profits, etc., and the petitioner was given his share and went out of the firm with it. His contention is that his retirement from the firm brought about a dissolution of the firm and that on such a dissolution the profits and capital etc., of the firm became consolidated into capital for distribution amongst the partners. He therefore contends that the sum in question cannot be assessed to Income Tax as profits following the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras v. Sidaha Gowder & Sons 1932 Mad. 375 in which the decision in Inland Revenue Commissioner v. Burrell (1924) 2 K.B. 52 was applied. The Commissioner of Income Tax contests this position and contends that the principle of the latter decision cannot be applied to the case of a partnership which is not a corporate body. That argument of course proceeds to the length of saying that th