Rajendra Nath Mittal, J.

1. This judgment will decide references Nos. 85, 86, 88 and 89 of 1974, which contain similar questions of law. The facts are being given, in the judgment, from references Nos. 88 and 89 of 1974. The Income-tax Tribunal, Amritsar, referred the following two questions for the opinion of this court, under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the 1961 Act "):

(Arising out of ITA No. 751/7.2-73)

"1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has rightly directed the Income-tax Officer to take the status of the assessee as registered firm for the assessment year 1968-69 ?"

(Arising out of ITA No. 754/72-73)

"1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that an appeal was maintainable before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the order of the Income-tax Officer refusing to renew registration under Section 184(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?"

2. Briefly, the facts which have given rise to these references are as follows :

The ITO, Jullundur, vide order dated March 4, 1972, refused registration to M/s. Mothooram Premchand, Phagwara