Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

1978 (7) TMI 84

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....delivered by SRINIVASA IYENGAR J.-The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, has referred the following question for decision by this court: Question in I.T.R.C. No. 2/1975: "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 65,200 accruing to the assessee by virtue of the deed (of dissolution) dated October....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the partners, namely, M. N. Lakshmana Shetty, assessee in I.T.R.C. No. 2 of 1975 and M. N. Eswara Shetty, assessee in I.T.R.C. No. 32 of 1975, retired from the partnership with effect from July 1, 1965. This dissolution is evidenced by a document drawn up on October 6, 1965. In accordance with the terms of the deed of dissolution, Lakshmana Shetty got a sum of Rs. 2,86,100 and Eswara Shetty....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is, the assessees preferred appeals to the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that as the ITO had exercised option to assess the firm as such, he had to proceed on the basis of the assessment of the firm and not include amounts which were not included in the profits of the firm, in the individual assessments as attributable to their shares. The Tribunal held that the firm had to be assessed and only the ....