https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284774 Section 25(4) was construed as a substantive relief provision preventing taxation of the period between the end of the previous year and succession where a business earlier taxed under the 1918 Act passed to another person. Section 25-A(2) was treated as a machinery rule for assessing a Hindu undivided family after partition, operating in a distinct field and not overriding that relief. The deemed continuance of the family for assessment purposes did not extinguish the exemption from double taxation. Accordingly, succession of the family business and assessment under Section 25-A(2) did not bar the assessee's claim to relief under Section 25(4). en-us Mon, 17 Dec 1945 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Dec 2019 13:04:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284774 Section 25(4) was construed as a substantive relief provision preventing taxation of the period between the end of the previous year and succession where a business earlier taxed under the 1918 Act passed to another person. Section 25-A(2) was treated as a machinery rule for assessing a Hindu undivided family after partition, operating in a distinct field and not overriding that relief. The deemed continuance of the family for assessment purposes did not extinguish the exemption from double taxation. Accordingly, succession of the family business and assessment under Section 25-A(2) did not bar the assessee's claim to relief under Section 25(4). Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 17 Dec 1945 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284774