COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX WEST BENGAL Vs. A W FIGGIS AND CO
LAWS(SC)-1953-9-4
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: CALCUTTA)
Decided on September 24,1953

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,WEST BENGAL Appellant
VERSUS
A.W.FIGGIS AND COMPANY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This is an appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta delivered in a reference under S. 66 (1), Income-tax Act, whereby the High Court answered the question referred in the affirmative.
(2.) The assessee is a partnership concern. When income-tax was paid under the Act of 1918, the partnership concern consisted of three partners, Mathews, Figgies and Notley. The name of the firm was A. W. Piggies and Co., and its business was that of tea brokers. There were several changes in the constitution of the firm resulting in a change in the shares of the partners. In 1924, Mathews went out and his share was taken over by Piggies and Notley. In 1926 another partner Squire was introduced. In 1932 Figgies went out, and from 1932 to 1939 the partnership consisted only of Notley and Squire. In 1939 Hillman was brought in and the partnership consisted of these three partners. In 1943 Notley went out and the partnership business was carried on by the two partners, Squire and Hillman. In 1945 Gilbert was brought in. This arrangement continued up to 31st May 1947 when the partnership was converted into a limited company.
(3.) For the assessment year 1947-48 the assessee claimed that it was entitled to relief under S. 25(4) of the Act as the partnership firm had been succeeded by a private limited company. There was a provision in the partnership deed of 1939 that on the retirement of any partner the partnership would not be determined but would be carried on by the remaining partners. It appears that a fresh partnership deed was drawn up in the year 1945 when Gilbert was brought in. The partnership constituted by these three partners continued to carry on the same business that had been started when the tax was paid under the Act of 1918. From the statement of the case, it does not appear that apart from the mere change in the personnel of the partners and in their respective shares there was any actual dissolution of the firm, and any division of its assets and liabilities or a succession to its business by any outside person.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.