https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7692 After dissolution of a firm under the pre-amendment Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the firm could not be assessed as a continuing taxable entity; liability had to be fastened on the partners jointly or severally under section 44. A notice of demand under section 29 was necessary against the assessee or other person liable to pay the tax. Because the deceased partner had not been validly assessed and no notice of demand had been served on him, no enforceable tax liability could be created against his estate. On that basis, the legal representative was not liable for the tax assessed on the dissolved firm and refusal of the tax clearance certificate was unjustified. en-us Tue, 23 Dec 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7692 After dissolution of a firm under the pre-amendment Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the firm could not be assessed as a continuing taxable entity; liability had to be fastened on the partners jointly or severally under section 44. A notice of demand under section 29 was necessary against the assessee or other person liable to pay the tax. Because the deceased partner had not been validly assessed and no notice of demand had been served on him, no enforceable tax liability could be created against his estate. On that basis, the legal representative was not liable for the tax assessed on the dissolved firm and refusal of the tax clearance certificate was unjustified. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 23 Dec 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7692