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

F.C.RUSTAGI, S.K.CHANDER
INCOME-TAX OFFICER – Appellant
Versus
LUXMI RICE MILLS – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.K. Bali,D.S. Gupta

ORDER

Per Shri S.K. Chander, Accountant Member - This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), dated 26-5-1981, relating to the assessment year 1978-79.

2. The issue before us as brought by the revenue is whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in directing the ITO to allow registration to the appellant firm. For determination of this issue, the facts that we have to take into consideration are as under:

3. The assessee is a registered firm working under the name and style of Luxmi Rice Mills, Pehowa. It had been assessed as a registered firm for the assessment year prior to the assessment year under appeal. Therefore, on 10-7-1978, when the return of income was filed by the assessee, the assessee also enclosed Form No. 12 for continuation of registration in terms of section 184(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). The firm actually consists of six partners, one of whom is Smt. Sarla Singal.

4. On receipt of the above documents, the ITO compared the signatures of Smt. Sarla Singal as given in Form No. 12 supra, and as given in the instrument of partnership filed with him. He, t

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