Shah, J. - (1.) A firm styled Sir Hukumchand Mannalal and Company was formed under a deed dated July 16, 1948 to carry on the business of "managing and selling agents" of Hukumchand Mills Ltd. Sir Hukumchand and his son Rajkumar Singh were two of the five partners of the fine. They represented the interest of the Hindu undivided family of Sir Hukumchand and his sons. On March 31, 1950 the property of the Hindu undivided family was partitioned and the interest of the family in the partnership was taken over by a private limited company styled Sir Sarupchand Hukumchand Ltd.
(2.) For the assessment years 1950-51, l951-52, 1952-53 and 1953-54 the Income-tax Officer granted registration of the firm under S. 26A of the Income Tax Act, 1922. In 1954-55 the Income-tax Officer declined to grant registration. In appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner confirmed the order on the ground that two coparceners could not represent the interest of the Hindu undivided family in a partnership. The Tribunal reversed the order. They held that Sir Hukumchand and his son Rajkumar Singh were partners in the firm on behalf of the Hindu undivided family and there was nothing in law which prevented two or more coparceners of a Hindu undivided family representing the family from entering into a partnership with a stranger or strangers.
(3.) At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax the following question was referred by the Tribunal: "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the firm Hukumchand and Mannalal Company could be granted registration under S. 26A of the Act - The High Court answered the question in the affirmative. The Commissioner of Income-tax has appealed to this Court with certificate granted by the High Court.;