PADAM PRAKASH Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed for the issuance of a writ, order or direction declaring the notices dt. 8th April, 1988, 24th March, 1988, and 3rd Feb., 1988, issued by the TRO, Meerut (second respondent), under rr. 31, 73 and 2 of the Second Schedule of the INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, respectively.

(2.) THE firm Raghunandan Prasad Manohar Lal, consisting of four partners, was an assessee under the Act. For the asst. year 1981 -82, a large amount of tax was determined to be payable by the firm. A notice under S. 156 of the Act was issued to the firm on 22nd Dec., 1987, calling upon it to remit a sum of Rs. 6,64,988.

(3.) A perusal of the judgment of this Court in Writ Petns. Nos. 754 of 1986 and 830 of 1986, dt. 25th Aug., 1987 discloses that the Bench allowed the writ petitions mainly on two grounds. The first ground is that "mere existence of a liability on the firm to pay tax is not sufficient to recover the same from the partners of the dissolved firm, unless the partners are treated as "assessees in default." This was so held following the decision of a learned Single Judge of the Mysore High Court in Balchand vs. TRO (supra). The second ground is that unless the partners are assessed in accordance with the provisions of ss. 182 and 183, the tax due from the dissolved firm cannot be recovered from its partners. This was so held following a decision of this Court in Brij Ratan Lal's case (supra).