BANERJEE,J. - (1.) THE Tribunal has forwarded the following question of law to this Court under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act') "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal; was right in holding, that the object of the partnership was not illegal and in upholding the orders of the AAC directing the ITO to grant continuance of registration to the assessee-firm for the asst. yrs. 1973-74 and 1974-75?'
(2.) IN the present proceeding the assessment years involved are 1973-74 and 1974-75 for which the relevant years of account are the years ended on 31st March, 1972 and 31st March, 1973. The facts of this case as appearing from the statement of case are as under.
(3.) FOR the assessment years under reference, as for the earlier assessment years, the assessee- firm made a declaration in Form No.12 seeking continuance of registration. The ITO rejected the declaration in Form No. 12 on the ground that for the preceding assessment years the assessee firm was refused registration and treated as an AOP and the question of granting continuance of registration did not, therefore, arise. On appeals preferred by the assessee-firm against these orders of the ITO refusing continuance of registration the AAC held that the orders of the ITO were no longer valid, since in the appeals preferred by the assessee-firm for the preceding asst. yrs. 1971-72 and 1972-73 the AAC granted continuance of registration to the assessee-firm. He, accordingly directed the ITO to grant registration to the assessee-firm and take the status of the assessee-firm as that of a registered firm for the two assessment years under reference. Being aggrieved by the orders of the AAC., the Department preferred appeal before the Tribunal and in the appeal the Tribunal upheld the decision of the AAC directing the ITO to allow registration to the assessee-firm for the assessment years under appeal. In its judgment the Tribunal relied on two decisions, one being of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Dayabhai & Co. vs. CIT (1966) 59ITR 364 and the other being of the Madras High Court in the case of T.K.P.R. Ramanatha Chettiar & Bros. vs. CIT (1969) 73 ITR 811 (Mad). In the earlier years, that is, for the asst. yrs. 1966-67 to 1972-73 the Tribunal upheld for the orders of the AAC directing the ITO to allow registration to the assessee-firm for the said assessment years.;