V S ARULANANDAM Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ARULANANDAM and Murugan were partners of a firm. ARULANANDAM resided in Ceylon while Murugan was a resident of Tuticorin, where the firm carried on its business. The firm applied for registration in the assessment year 1949-50, but that was refused by the Income-tax Officer. Against that order of refusal to register the firm, the assessee preferred an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. That appeal was eventually disposed of on June 21, 1955. The appeal was allowed and registration was granted under section 26A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Pending disposal of the appeal with reference to the assessment year 1949-50, the Income-tax Officer completed the assessments for 1952-53 and 1953-54 also. We may notice that the firm did not ask for registration in 1950-51. It applied for registration in 1951-52 but that was also refused. Registration was refused for 1952-53 and 1953-54 and the unregistered firm was assessed on its income. As ARULANANDAM had no separate income apart from his share income of the partnership, no assessment was levied on him in the assessment years 1952-53 and 1953-54. Those assessment orders on ARULANANDAM were completed on February 24, 1955, and in both the years his status was determined as " resident " and " ordinarily resident ", though he had himself claimed that his status was that of a non-resident

(2.) IN refusing registration for the two assessment years 1952-53 and 1953-54, what the INcome-tax Officer recorded was

(3.) ON March 29, 1956, the Income-tax Officer passed orders afresh with reference to each of the assessment years 1952-53 and 1953-54 in identical terms