https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290257 Where a prior statutory order had already recognised disruption of a Hindu undivided family, the Income Tax Officer could not reopen that question by fresh enquiry or treat the partnership as a mere camouflage. The renewal rule required registration to be renewed from year to year unless the firm's constitution had changed after the last certificate, and no such change was shown. The refusal to renew registration was therefore not justified, and the issue was answered in favour of the assessee. en-us Mon, 07 Jan 1935 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Sep 2020 12:52:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290257 Where a prior statutory order had already recognised disruption of a Hindu undivided family, the Income Tax Officer could not reopen that question by fresh enquiry or treat the partnership as a mere camouflage. The renewal rule required registration to be renewed from year to year unless the firm's constitution had changed after the last certificate, and no such change was shown. The refusal to renew registration was therefore not justified, and the issue was answered in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 07 Jan 1935 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290257