Separate profession tax liability for partners upheld where the firm and individual partner are distinct taxable persons.

Under the Karnataka Tax on Professions, Trades, Callings and Employments Act, 1976, profession tax is levied on each person engaged in a profession, and the statutory definition of "person" includes a firm and other entities. The Court treated a firm and its partners as distinct taxable persons, holding that assessment of the firm does not exempt an individual partner who independently carries on the same profession. Income-tax authorities were considered inapposite, while authority under the Punjab Municipal Act supported individual taxation of partners where the statute taxes persons practising a profession. The partner was therefore liable to profession tax separately from the firm, and the challenge to the levy failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a partner in a firm, engaged in the profession of tax consultancy, can be separately subjected to profession tax under the Karnataka Tax on Professions, Trades, Callings and Employments Act, 1976 when the firm itself is already enrolled and taxed as an assessee.

Analysis: The charging provision levies tax on every person engaged in a profession, trade, calling or employment, and the definition of "person" expressly includes a firm as well as other entities. The Court held that the tax is on the profession or calling and not merely on one collective unit of assessment. A firm and its partners are distinct for tax purposes, and the mere fact that the firm is assessed does not exempt an individual partner who independently carries on the profession. The reliance placed on income-tax cases was found misplaced, while the principle stated in the decision under the Punjab Municipal Act supported individual taxation of partners where the statute taxes persons practising a profession or carrying on a trade.

Conclusion: The partner was liable to be taxed independently in addition to the firm, and the challenge to the levy failed.

---