Firm registration under income-tax law failed because the partnership's execution date and continuous existence were not proved.

Registration of a firm under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 required a partnership constituted under an instrument and factual existence of the firm throughout the accounting year. The partnership deed was dated earlier than the purchase of the stamp paper, and the exact date of execution was not established. On those facts, it was not proved that the firm existed during the whole relevant accounting period, so refusal of registration was justified and the question was answered against the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in refusing registration of the firm under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.

Analysis: Registration under section 26A required that the firm be constituted under an instrument of partnership and that the partnership should have been in factual existence during the whole of the accounting year. The deed of partnership bore a date earlier than the purchase of the stamp paper, and the exact date of execution was not established. On the facts, it could not be shown that the partnership existed throughout the relevant accounting period.

Conclusion: The refusal of registration was justified and the question was answered against the assessee.

---