COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. BABULAL NATHMAL SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE has been issued in this application under S. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') made at the instance of the CIT. We do not propose to make the rule absolute for the reasons we now state.

(2.) THE questions proposed read thus :

(3.) THERE were only two partners. Upon the assessee relinquishing his share in the partnership, there was a dissolution, for a partnership cannot subsist with only one partner. There was an agreement between the partners that the assessee should get Rs. 15,000 for his share in the partnership. It was not necessary that there should be a division of the assets of the partnership or a valuation thereof. It was open to the partners to agree that the amount of Rs. 15,000 was the value of the assessee's share in the partnership. Sec. 47(ii) was, therefore, attracted.