https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7073 Relief under section 25(3) depends on whether the business itself was discontinued, not merely on a dissolution or reconstitution of the partnership. A prior statement referring to dissolution of the old firm and formation of a new one did not estop the assessee, because it also recognised continuation of the business by the remaining partners. On the facts, the solicitors' business was carried on under the same name with continuity of assets and working arrangements, so the relevant discontinuance occurred only in 1948. The assessee was therefore entitled to relief under section 25(3). en-us Tue, 16 Jan 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 08 Feb 2009 11:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7073 Relief under section 25(3) depends on whether the business itself was discontinued, not merely on a dissolution or reconstitution of the partnership. A prior statement referring to dissolution of the old firm and formation of a new one did not estop the assessee, because it also recognised continuation of the business by the remaining partners. On the facts, the solicitors' business was carried on under the same name with continuity of assets and working arrangements, so the relevant discontinuance occurred only in 1948. The assessee was therefore entitled to relief under section 25(3). Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 16 Jan 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7073