1983 (9) TMI 146

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the delay, the assessee filed an affidavit sworn by its accountant to show that the original partnership deed along with copies and application form was given to him by one of the partners but he was under the impression that they are to be filed with the ITO along with the return. The ITO, however, refused to condone the delay and rejected the assessee's claim for registration. The said conclusion was upheld by the AAC on appeal. The assessee has come up in second appeal before us. 2. We have heard the representatives of the parties at length in this appeal and in our opinion there is no force therein. One argument advanced on behalf of the assessee was that there was sufficient cause for the delay in filing of the application for regi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... end of the accounting year. If it is so, the signatures of the partners would be of a date earlier than the close of the accounting year. At the time of hearing before us, Shri Daga contended that the partners of the assessee-firm had signed blank application forms which, accordingly, had actually been filled in by Shri Daga when the papers were received by him in June 1978. This means that the date of June 1978, filled in by him, was actually not the date of the signatures by the partners on those application forms. In other words, either Shri Daga has added the date of his own which is not in accordance with the spirit of law, inasmuch as the date is to be inserted on which the application is actually signed or the affidavit is wrong. If....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sment as an unregistered firm could be made as it would involve double taxation. For this purpose, reliance was placed on a number of authorities namely, CIT v. Blue Mountain Engg. Corpn. [1978] 112 ITR 839 (Mad.), Laxmichand Hirjibhai v. CIT [1981] 128 ITR 747 (Guj.) and Universal Commercial Co. v. CIT [1981] 130 ITR 775 (Mad.). All these authorities lay down that once the ITO has exercised the option of assessing the partners on the share income of the firm, it would not be open to him to assess the firm as an unregistered firm. We are afraid we are not inclined to accept the assessee's contention raised in this behalf. Firstly, most of these decisions are under the 1922 Act and in this behalf, the AAC has rightly drawn the distinction be....