1981 (9) TMI 154

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the name of J.K. Tubewells & Co. was constituted in India by a Deed of Partnership dt. 5th Feb., 1972 w.e.f. 1st Jan., 1972 with a view for acquiring, as a going concern, the business of N.B. Tubewells & Co. There were seven partners, including Shri Jayantilal K. Patel of Ahmedabad and Shri Rohit J. Patel, the assessee, from Bombay. 3. In his assessments for the asst. yrs. 1973-74 to 1975-76 the assessee declared Inter alia, income by way of share in the firm of J.K. Tubewells & Co. This in turn, included income attributable to the business of the N.B. Tubewells & Co. in Nepal. The ITO made the corresponding assessments including such income in the total of the assessee. 4. further, the ITO passed orders under s. 91 holding that the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the income of the assessee.  The recitals in the Partnership Deed of J.K. Tubewells & Co. also show that the business of the N.B. Tubewells & Co., Nepal, is a business of this firm and that a part of income of the assessee is attributable to the business in the name of N.B. Tubewells & Co., Nepal.  It is clear that the income in question, which is included in the assessment of the assessee, has been taxed by the Nepal authorities as part of the income of N.B. Tubewells & Co. 7. The only further point is whether this is sufficient for allowing DIT relief when the assessment in Nepal is of the whole of the income of N.B. Tubewells & Co. and not of individual (i.e., the assessee) as such; and it would appear from the copy of the a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ia States where registration can be effected, relief should be given to partners entitled to receive the income on the basis of allocation in either of those two places. Board's Circular No. 56 of 1942 is hereby cancelled.  Circular: No. 6 of 1944 (B Dis. No. 25(6)-IT-43), dt. 17th March, 1944. 8. One of the objections raised by Shri Bhargava, the ld. Deptl. Rep. was that these instructions were withdrawn or modified by another circular of the Board of 29th July, 1976. However, since we are concerned with the orders passed for the assessment years prior to 1977-78, having regard to the principle of the decision of the Full Bench of the Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. B.M. Edward, India Sea Foods, Cochin (1979) 12 CTR (Ker) ....