Section 44 applied to dissolved firms before amendment, making section 34 notice against partners valid.

Before the Finance Act, 1958 amendment, section 44 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was read with the Partnership Act to determine whether proceedings under section 34 could continue against partners after a firm had been dissolved and permanently ceased business. Permanent cessation of the partnership business was treated as involving discontinuance and dissolution, and the winding-up period did not change the fact that the firm had come to an end. On that basis, the provision was held capable of being invoked against the partners of the dissolved firm, and the notice under section 34 was valid.

---

---

Issues: Whether, before the amendment made by the Finance Act, 1958, section 44 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 permitted proceedings under section 34 against the partners of a firm that had been dissolved and had permanently ceased business, and whether the impugned notice was valid.

Analysis: The statutory scheme was read with the definition of "firm" and "partnership" under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 and with the concept of dissolution under section 39 of that Act. The Court held that permanent cessation of the business of a partnership necessarily involved discontinuance and dissolution, and that the limited continuance contemplated for winding up did not alter the legal position that the partnership had come to an end. The earlier decision in the connected line of authority was treated as not finally deciding that section 44 excluded dissolved firms, and the Court concluded that the provision, even before amendment, was capable of being invoked against the partners of a dissolved firm.

Conclusion: The notice issued under section 34 was valid, and the petitioner was not entitled to relief.

---