Skip to content


Roopchand Chandanmal and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh. Lakshmi Satyanarayana Oil Mills V. Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtAndhra Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCases Referred Nos. 47 and 48 of 1961
Reported in[1966]59ITR624(AP)
AppellantRoopchand Chandanmal and Co.
RespondentCommissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh. Lakshmi Satyanarayana Oil Mills V. Commissioner of Incom
Excerpt:
- maximssections 2(xv) & 3(1) & (3): [v.v.s. rao, n.v. ramana & p.s. narayana, jj] ghee as a live stock product held, [per v.v.s. rao & n.v. ramana, jj - majority] since ages, milk is preserved by souring with aid of lactic cultures. the first of such resultant products developed is curd or yogurt (dahi) obtained by fermenting milk. dahi when subjected to churning yields butter (makkhan) and buttermilk as by product. the shelf life of dahi is two days whereas that of butter is a week. by simmering unsalted butter in a pot until all water is boiled, ghee is obtained which has shelf life of more than a year in controlled conditions. ghee at least as of now is most synthesized, ghee is a natural product derived ultimately from milk. so to say, milk is converted to dahi, then butter...........on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appeal filed by an ex-partner of the dissolved firm before the appellate assistant commissioner was competent ?'perhaps, at the time when the appellate tribunal refused to entertain the appeal, it had very probably applied the principles settled by the full bench in commissioner of income-tax v. rayalaseema oil mills. but later their lordships of the supreme court in c. a. abraham v. income-tax officer, kottayam, have held that penalty and assessment can be made on partners of the firm even after the dissolution of the firm. having regard to this principle, an ex-partner of a dissolved firm also can, as a consequence of this decision, agitate in appeal any penalty or assessment made against him and by which he is aggrieved......
Judgment:

JAGANMOHAN REDDY J. - The question that has been referred to us is :

'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appeal filed by an ex-partner of the dissolved firm before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was competent ?'

Perhaps, at the time when the Appellate Tribunal refused to entertain the appeal, it had very probably applied the principles settled by the Full bench in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Rayalaseema Oil Mills. But later their Lordships of the Supreme Court in C. A. Abraham v. Income-tax Officer, Kottayam, have held that penalty and assessment can be made on partners of the firm even after the dissolution of the firm. Having regard to this principle, an ex-partner of a dissolved firm also can, as a consequence of this decision, agitate in appeal any penalty or assessment made against him and by which he is aggrieved. Several references of this nature have also been answered by this court in the affirmative.

This reference is answered accordingly. No order as to costs. Advocates fee Rs. 50 only in one case.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //