DWARKADAS KHETAN AND CO Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS reference raises a question as to the right of the assessee firm to be registered under Section 26A, Income Tax Act.

(2.) THE facts are that prior to 01 -01 -1945 four partners, one of whom was Dwarkadas Khetan, carried on a partnership business. On 01 -01 -1945 the Partnership was dissolved and Dwarkadas carried on the business as a proprietary concern. Dwarkadas acquired the rights of the selling agency of the Seksaria Cotton Mills on 12 -02 -1946 and although the instrument which gave him this right was dated 12 -02 -1946 the right was to commence from 01 -01 -1946. On 27 -03 -1946 an instrument of partnership was executed by four persons who agreed to carry on the business of the selling agency in partnership. One was Dwarkadas Khetan. There were two other major partners and the third was a minor Kantilal Keshardeo. The partnership agreement was executed both by the minor himself and also by his natural guardian, his father, on behalf of the minor, and the assessee firm which was constituted under this partnership deed applied for registration under Section 26A and the application was rejected.

(3.) THE Advocate General has relied on a decision reported in - 'Banka Mal Lalja Ram and Co. v. Commissioner of Income -tax, Delhi,' AIR 1953 Punj 270. There the Punjab High Court held, as the headnote indicates,