9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted:- 26-4-2007 - JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by J. P. DEVADHAR J.— Heard Mr. A. S. Jaiswal, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. C. J. Thakkar, learned counsel for the respondent. 2 These three applications filed by the Revenue under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 were admitted on the following questions of law: "(1) 'Whether, on the facts and i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... application is rejected. 4 As regards question No. 2 is concerned, the assessee-company which is a domestic company was a partner in three different firms. The said firm derived dividend income from other domestic companies. The assessee claimed deduction under section 80M of the Act in respect of the assessee's income from the firm which was relatable to the dividend income received by the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of CIT v. Gopalkrishna M. Singre reported in [1995] 214 ITR 443. Since the reference application filed by the Revenue under section 256(1) of the Act was dismissed, the Revenue has filed this application. 5 This court in the case of Gopalkrishna M. Singre [1995] 214 ITR 443. has held that in the light of section 67(2) of the Act where a partner receives income from a firm then such in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
