1984 (3) TMI 97

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., that arises in this appeal, is about the claim for the benefit of registration for the assessment year in appeal. The ITO had denied the benefit of registration and had turned down the plea of the assessee that he was entitled to the renewal of the benefit of registration under s. 184(7) of the IT Act, but the CIT (A) on a consideration of the facts, vacated the order of the ITO and directed him....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....was made in the prescribed Form No.12, necessary declaration had been given in that Form. The ITO misunderstood the application and considered the claim for renewal of registration to be the one made for the benefits of registration by the firm, which, according to him, had undergone reconstitution merely. According to him, it was a reconstitution of a firm under s. 187 and not of succession under....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fore the CIT(A). he contended before the CIT(A) that the ITO had not properly appreciated his claim for allowing him the renewal of registration for the accounting year from 1st April, 1978 to 6th March, 1979, in respect of the old firm which had been dissolved. The ITO, on the other hand, considered the claim of the firm as continuing after 6th March, 1979 and he passed an order for the period 1s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....irm for the assessment year under consideration. The application in Form No. 11, together with the original copy of the Partnership Deed have been placed on file only for the asst. yr. 1980-81 and not for the assessment year under consideration. The assessee has, in fact, filed a declaration in Form No. 12, for continuation of registration of the firm for the asst. yr. 1979-80 and the return filed....