COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I V. M/S LALJIT HOSIERY

ITA/167/2011

AI Insights

The case revolves around an appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana against M/s. Jaljit Hosiery concerning the assessment year 2005-06. The primary legal contention was whether the requirement to furnish a certified copy of the partnership deed along with the return of income under Section 184(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is mandatory or directory. The assessing officer initially assessed the respondent as an Association of Persons (AOP) due to non-compliance with Section 184(4), leading to disallowance of certain deductions. However, the CIT(A) and subsequently the Tribunal reversed this decision, allowing the deductions and recognizing the assessee as a firm, based on the late submission of the partnership deed during the assessment proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 719023 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 07-07-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corporation, 254 ITR 6 (P&H) (Full Bench)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESH KATOCH
• Keywords: Assessment Year; Certified Copy; Directory vs Mandatory; Income Tax; Partnership deed
• Section: 143(3); 260A; 184(4)

Judgement Text

"~ ! ~ l- e::: ;:) 0 U :t: C) - :t: « z ~ 0:= « J: c z « en !: a:= c. thus, dismissed. 9. No perversity or illegality could be pointed out by ths learned counsel for the appellant in the finding recorded by the CIT(A)reversing the order of the assessing officer,whereby the claim of the assessee for assessment as a firm and deduction on account of salary and interest paid to the partners had been disallowed, and , , also in the order of the Tribunal whereby the finding ofthe CIT(A)was affirmed. No substantial question of law, thus, arises for consideration of this Court. 10. In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed. I July 7, 2011 *rkmalik* "