https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15562 Continuance of firm registration could not be refused merely because the income of another firm was included in the assessee-firm's total income where the firm's constitution and profit-sharing ratio remained unchanged; on those facts, the statutory benefit of continuation was upheld. At the same time, the scope of scrutiny on renewal was clarified: the Income-tax Officer was not barred from examining the genuineness of the firm, the identity of the partners, and the profit-sharing ratio in accordance with binding Supreme Court law. en-us Thu, 27 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Aug 2009 10:36:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15562 Continuance of firm registration could not be refused merely because the income of another firm was included in the assessee-firm's total income where the firm's constitution and profit-sharing ratio remained unchanged; on those facts, the statutory benefit of continuation was upheld. At the same time, the scope of scrutiny on renewal was clarified: the Income-tax Officer was not barred from examining the genuineness of the firm, the identity of the partners, and the profit-sharing ratio in accordance with binding Supreme Court law. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 27 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15562