TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1975 (3) TMI 32
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he sake of convenience these appeals are disposed of by this common order. 2. We first take up the assessee's appeal against the refusal of registration. The firm is constituted under a deed of partnership dt. 2nd Jan., 67. The deed in original together with a copy thereof and application for registration in Form No. 11 was filed on 16th Nov., 67. According to the partnership deed the firm is constituted of the following partners: (i) Shri Pukh Raj 25 per cent (ii) Shri Khem Singh 25 per cent (iii) Shri Ugam Singh 25 per cent (iv) Smt. Shanti Devi 25 per cent The partnership deed and the application for registration in Form No. 11 has been signed by all the four partners mentioned above. During the course of as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....It is contended by the assessee's representative that the books of accounts were lost in 1968; to be more precise on 22nd June, 68. Therefore, when the ITO, asked the assessee to produce accounts the same could not have been produced. Further, the assessment for the asst. yr. 1966-67 was made on 7th March, 72 and this fact was admitted by the ITO, that the books were lost. But even then he made the assessment under s. 143 of the Act. The estimate for the assessment under appeal was made on 5th Jan., 73. The ITO should have appreciated the fact that the books for the four years from 1964 to 1967 were lost. In such a case the assessee was prevented by a reasonable cause in not producing the books of accounts before the ITO. The assessee speci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the rival parties. We are of the view that the assessee's contention must prevail. It is no doubt true that the assessee did not produce the books before the ITO. But the assessee cannot be called upon to produce something which is not in its possession. All the partners had categorically declared before the ITO that the books of accounts for the accounting years 1964 to 1967 were lost by Shri Bhikaram, husband of Smt. Shanti Devi. The first information report was lodged with the police authorities but the books of account were not traced. This fact has been admitted by the ITO in the asst. yr. 1966-67 which assessment was made on or before 7th March, 72. Even the sales-tax authorities have admitted that the books were really lost by the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of Rs. 3,300 being the credits in the names of Smt. Vimal Kanwar, Rs. 1,500 and interest credited to Shri Bhikaram amounting to Rs. 1800 are not warranted in view of the fact that the confirmation of Smt. Vimal Kanwar was not possible as she expired and legal heirs were also not in Jodhpur. This was a petty deposit and the ITO ought to have accepted, in view of the small quantum and explanation given by the assessee. There is no fresh deposit in the account of Bhikaram but only the accumulated interest for the last few years was credited. 7. We have found that the books of account were not produced by the assessee, as the same were lost by Shri Bhikaram, husband of Smt. Sita Devi, partner. In the absence of accounts it was not possible....