Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the distribution of partnership assets on dissolution between the partners amounts to a sale or otherwise transferred by the assessee so as to attract withdrawal of development rebate under section 34(3)(b) read with section 155(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Analysis: The question turned on whether the words "sold or otherwise transferred" in section 34(3)(b) and the corresponding machinery under section 155(5) covered distribution of assets on dissolution of a firm. The Court examined the earlier Supreme Court rulings on dissolution of partnership assets and noted the principle that distribution of surplus assets on dissolution is an adjustment of the rights of partners and not a transfer for a price. The Court further considered the widened definition of "transfer" in section 2(47) and the definition of "person" in section 2(31), but held that these did not alter the legal character of a dissolution distribution so as to make it a transfer by the assessee within the meaning of section 34(3)(b).
Conclusion: The distribution of assets of the dissolved firm did not amount to a sale or transfer within section 34(3)(b) read with section 155(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the issue was answered in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Distribution of partnership assets on dissolution is an adjustment of mutual rights and liabilities, not a transfer or sale by the firm to the partners for purposes of withdrawing development rebate.