SUPPLY AGENCY Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A firm in the name of Supply Agency came into existence in July, 1944, and it came to be dissolved by April, 1945. An effort was made to reopen the assessment of income -tax made on this firm by a notice dt. 26th Aug., 1948. This notice having been found invalid, a fresh notice was issued on 21st Feb., 1949. The notice was, however served on only one of the five partners of the dissolved firm, namely, Mangalchand Ramkumar. A return was filed under protest by this firm showing an income of Rs. 76,716.80. The ITO, however, assessed the firm at a sum of Rs. 1,35,200. An objection was taken to the initiation of the proceeding under S. 34 of the Indian IT Act, 1922, for short "the Act", on the ground that the firm of Supply Agency having been dissolved, notice on one of the partners was not sufficient notice in the eye of law. This contention was not entertained by the ITO but was upheld by the AAC. On further appeal, the Tribunal, however, disagreed with the AAC. A prayer was thereafter made before the Tribunal to refer the following questions of law to this Court which the Tribunal did not do :

(2.) ON refusal of the Tribunal to state the case and the aforesaid questions of law, the assessee has approached this Court.

(3.) WE have also been referred to Jai Prakash Singh vs. CIT 1977 CTR (Gau) 232 : (1978) 111 ITR 507 (Gau) in which it was held that in case of assessment of a person a notice issued under S. 143 after the death of the assessee on only one of the several legal representatives would not be valid. Learned counsel submits that the same principle would apply in the case of a dissolved firm. Whether the contention of Shri Bhattacharjee is correct or not, we do not propose to express any opinion at this stage. Presently, we would only say that the following question of law does arise in the present case :