https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29660 The court upheld the Commissioner's decision to cancel the development rebate granted to the assessee-firm due to the firm's dissolution following a partner's death. It was determined that the dissolution before the statutory eight-year period led to the rebate's wrongful grant. The reconstitution of the firm with the surviving partner and deceased partner's heirs did not constitute a transfer of assets. The court emphasized the requirement for continuous use of the development rebate reserve for business purposes. The cancellation was deemed justified under the Income Tax Act, and the assessee was directed to cover the department's costs, with the option to appeal to the Supreme Court. en-us Mon, 02 Nov 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:49:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29660 The court upheld the Commissioner's decision to cancel the development rebate granted to the assessee-firm due to the firm's dissolution following a partner's death. It was determined that the dissolution before the statutory eight-year period led to the rebate's wrongful grant. The reconstitution of the firm with the surviving partner and deceased partner's heirs did not constitute a transfer of assets. The court emphasized the requirement for continuous use of the development rebate reserve for business purposes. The cancellation was deemed justified under the Income Tax Act, and the assessee was directed to cover the department's costs, with the option to appeal to the Supreme Court. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 02 Nov 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29660