2004 (11) TMI 42

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....egistration filed in Form No. 11A for the assessment year 1971-72 was allowed. Registration was also renewed for the subsequent assessment years 1972-73 to 1976-77. However, the Assessing Officer thereafter noticed that the partnership deed produced by the petitioner on which registration was granted was signed only by one partner for himself and for other partners who are his sons by forging their signatures. It was also noticed that one of the partners was a minor who did not even attain the age of majority during the assessment year 1971-72. Cancellation of registration under section 186(1) was challenged in successive appeals and the Tribunal confirmed the orders. Thereafter the petitioner took up the matter in reference to this court a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....195 ITR 716) above referred to wherein this court after declining to answer the questions referred to it remanded the cases back to the Assessing Officer. According to counsel for the petitioner, this court has considered all the issues in detail and the remand was for the purpose of considering registration for 1971-72 and renewal of registration for later years based on new application for registration in Form No. 11A and Form No. 12 declarations to be filed along with new partnership deed properly executed with the signature of all the partners. According to him, registration should have been granted based on fresh deed and forms filed in terms of the observations and findings in the above referred judgment of the Division Bench of this ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....efects pointed out in the document and when this court remanded the case to the authorities giving opportunity to the petitioner to cure the defects, it is to be assumed that the defects referred to therein are capable of being cured. Standing counsel, on the other hand, submitted that the defects in the original deed were grave and incapable of being cured. In the first place the original partnership deed on which registration was sought was signed by a partner who was a minor and for no period relevant to the assessment year 1971-72 the said partner was a major. A partnership deed executed with a minor as a partner is an invalid agreement and such firm cannot be called a genuine firm entitled to registration. Therefore, cancellation of re....