COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. TY K NATARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Tribunal, at the instance of the Revenue, has referred the following question of law for our consideration under s. 256(1) of the IT Act for the asst. yr. 1979-80:

(2.) The assessee is a joint family and assessment year with which we are concerned is 1979-80. The assessee claimed that there was a partial partition on 2nd March, 1979 and made an application before ITO that the partial partition should be recognised. The ITO rejected the request of the assessee on the ground that in view of s. 171(9) of the IT Act, the partial partition cannot be recognised. The AAC confirmed the order of the ITO. The Tribunal, however, held that s. 171(9) of the Act which was introduced by Finance (No. 2) Act of 1980 is applicable only for the asst. yr. 1980-81 onwards and did not apply to the asst. yr. 1979-80. The Revenue has challenged order of the Tribunal and the question of law set out earlier has been referred to us.

(3.) It is seen that s. 171(9) of the Act was introduced by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 1980 w.e.f. 1st April, 1980, though s. 171(2) of the Act states that a partial partition taking place after 31st Dec., 1978, cannot be recognised under s. 171 of the Act.