RANU BROS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE propose to dispose of all the three above petitions by one single order as the parties in all the three cases are same and relate to matters under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1969-70, 1970-71 and 1971-72 and the points arising in all the above cases are almost identical.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the Income-tax Case No. 199/1975 are that the petitioner moved an application under Section 185 of the I.T. Act for registration of a partnership firm consisting of Shri R.K. Bhargava, Shri Raja Ram and Shri Rahul. The partnership was alleged to have been constituted through a partnership deed dated 3rd November, 1967. Shri Rahul at this time was admittedly a minor. The ITO by his order dated 2nd March, 1972, refused registration, holding that the said partnership was not a genuine one. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the AAC, who, by his order dated 15th June, 1972, set aside the order of the ITO and held that the partnership was a genuine one. The department preferred an appeal to the Tribunal which allowed the appeal filed by the department, vide its order dated 26th November, 1973, and upheld the order of the ITO. The petitioner submitted an application under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act requiring the Tribunal to draw up a statement of the case and to refer the same to this court. The learned Tribunal, however, by its order dated 28th November, 1974, rejected the reference application of the petitioner and hence the petitioner has submitted an application under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act forgiving a direction to the Tribunal to draw up a statement of the case and to raise and refer the questions of law mentioned in the petition.

(3.) THE name and style of the business in the partnership was also carried on in the same name, i.e., "M/s. Ranu Bros."