COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. SWASTIK INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, has referred the following question of law for decision of this court :

(2.) WE heard counsel for the Revenue and also counsel for the respon-dent-assessee. The entire matter is in a very narrow compass. WE are concerned with the assessment year 1975-76. The previous year ended on March 31, 1975. The assessee-respondent-firm was given registration for the assessment year 1974-75. At that time, the firm had 18 partners. By the retirement of five persons, the firm stood dissolved with effect from March 31, 1975. The remaining 13 persons continued the firm from April 1, 1975. The said partners, who continued the firm from April 1, 1975, filed declaration in Form No. 12 on July 28, 1975, for continuation of the registration for the year 1975-76. The list of persons who were partners in the firm from April 1, 1975, was made available to the Income-tax Officer. It was also the admitted case before the Tribunal, that the firm from April 1, 1975, with 13 persons was granted registration for the assessment year 1976-77. The Income-tax Officer did not grant continuation of registration for 1975-76 holding that all the 18 partners, who constituted the firm during the relevant accounting period that ended on March 31, 1975, did not sign the declaration in Form No. 12. In appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) held that the declaration in Form No. 12 needed to be made only by the partners who constituted the firm on the date of making of such declaration and as on that date 13 persons were partners and continued the firm from April 1, 1975, they had signed the declaration in Form No. 12, and so it should have been accepted and refusal to grant continuation of registration by the Income-tax Officer was held not justified.

(3.) WE adopt the above reasoning and observations as our own.