https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276714 Relief under section 25(4) of the Indian Income-tax Act depended on whether the business had really succeeded as a going concern rather than been discontinued and restarted. The court treated the continuity of operations as decisive: the son carried on the same business at the same premises, with the same contact details, trade marks, staff, goodwill and business connections, showing substantial succession. The father's retention of the old firm name for liquidation of liabilities did not defeat relief where the business continued without break and the surrounding facts showed an intention that the son should carry it on. Relief was therefore available and the issue was answered in favour of the assessee. en-us Wed, 21 Dec 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Nov 2018 12:17:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276714 Relief under section 25(4) of the Indian Income-tax Act depended on whether the business had really succeeded as a going concern rather than been discontinued and restarted. The court treated the continuity of operations as decisive: the son carried on the same business at the same premises, with the same contact details, trade marks, staff, goodwill and business connections, showing substantial succession. The father's retention of the old firm name for liquidation of liabilities did not defeat relief where the business continued without break and the surrounding facts showed an intention that the son should carry it on. Relief was therefore available and the issue was answered in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 21 Dec 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276714