COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. HAZARIMAL MILAPCHAND SURANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON an application filed under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following questions for our opinion ;

(2.) THE business of the assessee-firm had commenced on November 9, 1969, and the partnership deed was executed on November 11, 1969, THEre were four partners in the firm, namely, Mannalal Surana, Nirmalkumar Surana, Vimalkumar Surana and Narendrakumar Surana. THEy share profits in the ratio of 10 per cent., 30 per cent., 30 per cent, and 30 per cent., respectively. THE business of the partnership firm was import and export of precious and semi-precious and synthetic stones and to deal in jewellery articles and also to act as commission agents for purchase and sale of precious and semi-precious and synthetic stones and also to manufacture the precious and semi-precious stones.

(3.) MR. Singhi, learned counsel for the Revenue, submits that when the partners are common in the assessee-firm and the firm Mannalal Nirmalkumar Surana and Co., profit and loss sharing ratio is same, business is same, the place of working is same, the Tribunal has committed error in reversing the finding of the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). He further submits that firm, Mannalal Nirmalkumar Surana, came into existence in 1976 and was closed on January 20, 1982, just after the capital contributed was sold in the name of business of the firm of Mannalal Nirmalkumar Surana and Co.