Joint and several recovery from a partner was unavailable where tax belonged to another partner's separate assessment.

A registered firm was treated as a separate assessment unit only in the limited manner provided by the Income-tax Act, so each partner's total income, including his share of firm profits, was assessed individually. Tax attributable to one partner's share could not be recovered jointly and severally from another partner merely because the first partner defaulted. Section 44 was confined to cases of discontinuance of business or dissolution of an association, and could not be extended to impose liability for another partner's individual assessment under section 23(5)(a). On that basis, joint recovery was held unavailable and the demand notices were quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in the assessment of a registered firm under section 23(5)(a), the tax attributable to one partner's share could be recovered jointly and severally from another partner when the defaulting partner failed to pay.

Analysis: Under the scheme of the Indian Income-tax Act, a registered firm was not itself assessed to tax; instead, each partner's total income, including his share of the firm's profits, was separately assessed and the tax payable by that partner was determined on that basis. Section 44 created joint and several liability only in cases of discontinuance of a firm's business or dissolution of an association, and that provision could not be extended to make one partner liable for another partner's individual assessment under section 23(5)(a). The authorities relied upon did not support the proposition that, in a registered firm, tax assessed on one partner's share could be recovered from the other partners.

Conclusion: The liability could not be enforced jointly and severally against the respondent, and the demand notices were rightly quashed.

---