this companytention was number accepted by the department and on appeal by the tribunal.
60589 respectively.
whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the tribunal was right in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee from his personal business including his share of loss from anumberher firm cannumber be set off under section 24 1 against his taxed share income from an unregistered firm?
118913 and rs.
139922 respectively against which were set off his losses in his individual business rs.
appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated october 31 1956 of the former nagpur high companyrt in misc.
from the unregistered firm could number be set off against the loss in his individual business as the profits of the unregistered firm had borne tax number in his hands but in those of the firm.
m. phakar s. n. andley j. b. dadachanji and bameshwar nath for the respondents.
the assessee had received some profits from his share in an unregistered firm against which were set off his losses in his individual business and the income tax officer who made the assessment determined the loss to be carried forward at rs.
civil case number 184 of 1953.
these questions were answered by the high companyrt against the commissioner who has number appealed with special leave.
march 7.
182773 and rs.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeals number.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by hidayatullah j. these appeals by special leave have been filed by the companymissioner of income tax madhya pradesh against the assessee an individual by name seth khushal chand daga.
148 to 150 of 1960.
in these years he had profits from his share in the unregistered firm rs.
the companytention was however raised again by him in the assessments for the years 194849 and 1949 50.
the assessee appealed against the assessment but did number question the loss which had been determined.
the companytention of the assessee was that the profits which he had derived.
for the year 1942 43 the assessee claimed to reopen the question of the loss to be carried forward stating that it was rs.
in the year of account ending diwali 1941 he received his share of assets and property from this firm and started business of his own.
the assessee was a partner in a firm messrs.
the two questions pertaining to these appeals were whether the assessee was companypetent in law to raise a question with regard to the determination of loss for the assessment year 1941 42 as finally determined in appeal in the companyrse of proceedings for the assessment year 1942 43 when the loss brought forward from 1941 42 was being set off ?
n. rajagopala sastri and d. gupta for the appellants.
in the same year his sources of income were speculation allowance from government as treasurer house property and dividends.
b. bansilal abirchand of nagpur.
