Prakash Krishna, J. - (1.) THIS is a reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act. The following question of law has been referred to this Court: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in upholding the decision of the CIT(A) whereby he directed the ITO to frame another assessment on the reconstituted firm for the period from 1st Oct., 1975 to 31st March, 1976 ?"
(2.) THE assessment year involved is 1976-77. Originally the assessee-firm consisted of six partners including three minors Km. Manprit, Dilprit Kaur and Inderpit Kaur. A fresh partnership deed was drawn w.e.f. 30th Sept., 1975. Harjeet Singh. Bhajan Singh and Smt. Amrit Kaur, who were also the partners in the old firm continued to be partners in the firm even after 30th Sept., 1975. THE aforesaid three minors retired from the partnership. Sec. 187(2) of the IT Act provides that on retirement of partners, the old firm continues as it is a case of reconstitution of firm. The aforesaid controversy has been set at rest by a Division Bench of our Court in the case of CIT vs. Ram Jas Rai Askaran Das (1996) 134 CTR (All) 407: (1996) 218 ITR 18 (All). In view of the aforesaid judgment the question referred is answered in favour of the Department and against the assessee. Only one assessment has to be made for the entire previous year relevant for the asst. yr. 1976-77.;