1989 (1) TMI 72

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y GOKAL CHAND MITAL J.-Gobind Ram Vishan Dass, the assessee, was a partnership firm and was granted registration for the year prior to the assessment year 1977-78, the accounting year being from Dussehra to Dussehra. For the assessment year 1977-78, the accounting year was October 9, 1975, to October 6, 1976. On June 24, 1976, Vasdev, one partner retired. Two separate returns were filed, one fr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r appeal, the Tribunal followed Addl. CIT v. Abdul Kareem and Co. [1979] 117 ITR 233, a decision of the Madras High Court, and held that a separate assessment up to June 24, 1976, could be framed and registration could be continued up to that date. On these facts, the following question has been referred to this court for opinion : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y one assessment is to be framed. On the contrary, in Abdul Kareem's case [1979] 117 ITR 233, the Madras High Court took the view that registration could be granted for a partial period. Similar view was taken by a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court CIT v. Shiv Shanker Lal Ram Nath [1977] 106 ITR 342, but that was dissented from by a Full Bench of our court in Nandlal Sohanlal's case [1977....