B RAGHURAMA PRABHU ESTATE EXECUTRIX SMT M KAVERI BAIJT CIT Vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXARATHI SHENOY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE assessee as well as the Department, being aggrieved by the order dt. 31st July, 2000, passed by the Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, have preferred these appeals under Section 260a of the IT Act, 1961 (in short the 'act' ). These appeals relate to the asst. yr. 1995-96, the previous year being the financial year ending on 31st March, 1995.

(2.) THE impugned order of the Tribunal had been passed in eight appeals preferred by the eight assessees. These assessees are the erstwhile partners of a dissolved firm which was carrying on business of manufacturing Beedies under the firm name M/s Mangalore Ganesha Beedi Works (in short the 'mgbw" ). The firm was comprised of thirteen partners. It stood dissolved on 6th dec. , 1987, by efflux of time. Thereafter, the business was carried on behalf of all the erstwhile partners as an AOP till the affairs of the firm was finally wound up. The assets of the firm were ultimately sold under the orders of this Court in a winding up proceedings w. e. f. 21st Nov. , 1994.

(3.) BEFORE entering into the facts in detail, we find it advantageous to clarify a basic fact which has led to certain amount of confusion at all stages of the proceedings. This confusion had arisen primarily because of the name 'mangalore Ganesha Beedi Works' successively adopted by three different taxable entities, namely, the partnership firm, an AOP consisted of 13 members and another AOP consisting of 3 members. For the sake of convenience, we will be referring to these taxable entities as 'the firm', 'aop-13' and 'aop-3'. At this very stage, we may state that in the year 1993, the number of members of AOP-13 reduced to twelve because one of its members namely, Sri Vinod Rao, having 7. 5 per cent share, had transferred his interest by a deed of assignment dt. 3rd July, 1993 to 7 out of other 12 members leading to rise in their shares. But, this assignment of interest does not have any material relevance for deciding the legal issues involved herein.