TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1985 (8) TMI 229
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is under the name and style 'Mentha & Allied Products'. In the year 1974-75 this sole proprietorship business was converted into a partnership business with Shri N. L. Nanda and Shri Subhash Chandra as the partners. During the year 1975-76 with effect from 1-1-1976, three more partners were added to the said partnership business, namely, Shri Arvind Kumar, Shri Anand Kumar and Shri Vijay Kumar Verma and a partnership deed was executed on 1-1-1976. This partnership continued upto 31st March, 1978 and on that date Shri Subhash Chandra retired from the partnership business and a deed of dissolution dated 3rd April, 1978 was duly executed and thereafter a partnership deed was executed on 4th April, 1978 between the remaining four partners. In t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e the Central Board of Excise & Customs, New Delhi who by its Order No. 216B of 1982 dated 20.7.1982 modified the order of the Collector in several respects and also reduced the penalty imposed from Rs. 10 lakhs to Rs. 2 lakhs. 3. Not satisfied, the appellants M/s. Mentha Allied Products, through its partner Shri N.L. Nanda filed an appeal before this Tribunal. 4. During the course of hearing of this appeal, the departmental representative raised a preliminary objection that the appellants M/s. Mentha & Allied Products, which is a dissolved partnership firm has no locus stand to file this appeal before this Tribunal and hence the same be rejected as not maintainable. 5. We have heard Shri A.N. Haksar, Advocate along with Shri D.N. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... some other decisions of Rajasthan High Court reported in AIR 1966 Rajasthan 187, AIR 1973 Rajasthan 39, AIR 1974 S.C. 1094 and another decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court reported in AIR 1978 (Notes on cases) 218 in support of his contention but he mainly relied upon the decision given by the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Ghanshyamdas Chhotalal (supra), the facts of which are applicable to the present case on all fours. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court, Shri Haksar argued that under the Act it is the firm that is assessed to tax and not any of its partners in their individual capacity. The liability of the firm to assessment to tax in respect of the transactions effected by it whil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Ghanshyamdas Chhotalal (AIR 1964 MP 161) and the provisions of Section 47 of the Partnership Act. There is no dispute that the liability created against the appellants by the department is for the period during which the partnership was in existence. If the assessment is not made and the tax amount is not determined before the dissolution of the firm, the liability to pay tax does not disappear. It continues to exist and can be quantified by making an assessment and determining the tax amount in winding up proceedings. Under Section 47 of the Partnership Act after the dissolution of a firm the authority of each partner to bind the firm and the other mutual rights and obligations of t....