JUDGMENT
P.C. Balakrishna Menon, C.J.
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, has referred the following question of law for the decision of this court:
“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right, in law, in allowing registration to the firm for the assessment year 1966-67 ?”
2. The assessment related to the year 1966-67 and the previous year relevant to the assessment year ended on June 30, 1965. The assessee, a registered firm, had 19 partners. One of the partners by name Lal Ram Sukh Pass died on June 4, 1965. As per Clause 8 of the deed of partnership produced as annexure-A, the assessee’s widow was taken as a partner of the firm and the reconstituted partnership was also registered with the Income-tax Department. The Income-tax Officer refused to give the assesses-firm the benefit of registration under Section 184(7) of the Income-tax Act as, according to him, there was dissolution of the firm on the death of one of the partners during the accounting period. This order of the Income-tax Officer was affirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. In appeal before the Tribunal, the Judicial Member and the Accountant Member passed separate orders expressing different views on the question of law. The case was referred to a third Member and based on the opinion of the majority, the Tribunal directed the registration of the firm for the assessment year 1966-67 after affording the assessee an opportunity to submit a proper application for registration.
3. The question referred to this court is covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in Wazid Ali Abid Ali v. CIT [1988] 169 ITR 761. The assessee-firm had obtained registration during the accounting year till June 4, 1965 and, in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court referred to above, the assessee-firm is entitled to the benefit of registration till that date. The firm had also applied for registration of the reconstituted firm. That application, however, happened to be in Form No. 11A instead of Form No. 12. It is under these circumstances that the Tribunal has directed the assessee to file an application in the proper form with a further direction to the Income-tax Officer for effecting registration for the accounting period. Since there was already an application for registration, though not in the proper form, the direction for registration given by the Tribunal is perfectly legal.
4. For the aforesaid reasons, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. A copy of this judgment under the signature of the Registrar and the seal of the court will be forwarded to the Tribunal.