COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. HARNANDRAI BADRIDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts found and/or admitted in these proceedings are rather unusual. Messrs. Harnandrai Badridas, the assessee, was assessed to income-tax for the assessment year 1949-50, the relevant previous year being Diwali 2004-2005. As the assessee did not file its return of income or produce its books of account at the assessment, the ITO made the assessment under Section 23(4) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, in the status of an unregistered firm. It was recorded in the order of assessment as follows : " The question of renewal of registration does not arise since there is no application for the same."

(2.) The assessee preferred an appeal against the said order of the ITO refusing to grant registration and contended in the appeal that an application for renewal of registration had been duly filed. The AAC found that the assessee's application for renewal of registration had been received by the revenue authorities on the 27th February, 1953. He, therefore, directed the ITO to dispose of the application for renewal of registration according to law and allowed the assessee's appeal. He construed the order of the ITO to be a consolidated order under Section 23(4) and Section 26A of the said Act.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the order of the AAC, the revenue went up in appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the ITO had not considered the question of the registration at all inasmuch as he was under the belief that no application for the renewal of registration had been made by the assessee.