The main and only companytention of the assessee before both the appellate authorities was inasmuch as a partner of the assessee firm, Sri Manoharlal, has been assessed on January 31, 1966 including his share income from the assessee firm in his asset, the assessment made on assessee firm on March 23, 1966 was number permissible.
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessment of the assessee as an unregistered form for the assessment year 1961 62 was proper?
They pointed out that while the assessment of Manoharlal partner was made by Income Tax Officer A Ward, Howrah, the assessment on the assessee firm was made by the Income Tax Officer C Ward, Howrah.
The assessment in question relates to Assessment Year 1961 62, governed by Indian Income Tax Act, 1922.
The order of assessment dated January 31, 1966 on partner reads Return field.
He companyputed the total income at Rs.59,623/ which included the sum of Rs.50,000/ as income from other sources which was agreed to by the assessee see para 3 of statement of case .
That was done by the Income Tax Officer A Ward while the assessment on the firm was made by the Income Tax Officer C Ward, on March 23, 1966.
Since it did number apply for registration, the Income Tax Officer companypleted the assessment treating the assessee as an unregistered firm.
The Calcutta High Court has answered the following question, referred at the instance of the assessee, in the negative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
The assessees appeal to Appellate Assistant Commissioner was dismissed and so was the further appeal to Tribunal.
The assessment on the partner was companypleted earlier i.e., on January 31, 1966.
Assessee has shown his income at Rs.982/ .
Both the appellate authorities rejected this companytention.
This is accepted for the time being.
The partner, Manoharlal, companyld have applied for rectification of his assessment order as provided expressly in the order of assessment itself.
It is stated by the assessee that all this business income is taken over by the firm M s. Manoharlal Gupta Company and his individual income is from that firm only.
The assessee is a firm.
Notice u s. 143 2 companyplied with.
