Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.44 seconds)Section 144 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Karnataka Excise Act, 1965
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S S B Pannalkar & Co on 2 November, 2010
In this view of the matter, the action of the learned CIT(Appeals) in
placing reliance on and following the aforesaid decision in the case of M/s. S.B. Pannalkar &
Co. (supra) is in order and we have no hesitation in upholding the decision of the learned
CIT(Appeals) on this issue. We, therefore, dismiss ground No.4 raised by revenue.
5.3.3 It is not in dispute that the assessee has been assessed in the status of a firm
for several years. Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of section 184 of the Act,
the assessee shall be assessed in the same capacity, unless there is a change in the
constitution of the firm. The Assessing Officer in the order of assessment has observed
that there has been a change in the partnership deed of the firm in the period under
7
ITA No. 1051/Bang/12
consideration. This observation of the Assessing Officer was disputed by the assessee
before us. It was submitted by the learned Authorised Representative that there was
neither a change in the constitution of the firm nor in the shares of the partners and
therefore the assessee is liable to be assessed as a firm only in the period under
consideration. It was also submitted by the learned Authorised Representative that there
has been no defaults as mentioned in section 144 of the Act for the Assessing Officer to
invoke the provisions of section 184(5) of the Act. In the above factual view of the
matter, we are of the considered opinion that there is no basis for the Assessing Officer
to invoke the provisions of section 184 of the Act to disallow the remuneration and
interest paid to the partners by the assessee firm.
1