9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (7) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e said findings are essentially findings of fact. - The inferences drawn by the Tribunal are from factual aspects noted by the Commissioner and, in our view, cannot be said to be based on irrelevant material - Accordingly, we decline to entertain this Revenue’s appeal. Dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... February 22,1988. Pursuant thereto the assessee filed its return of income declaring nil income after adjustment of the brought forward losses, though for the relevant assessment year the assessee's income was Rs. 20,11,763. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had made payments of Rs. 26,700 each as salary to Ms. Indu Sahni and Ms. Neera Sahni, wives of the two directors of the company. The assessee was required to furnish evidence with regard to the services rendered by the two ladies. It was claimed by the assessee that the said two ladies were sales and liasoning officers of the company. Not being satisfied with the explanation furnished, the Assessing Officer disallowed the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r held that the assessee had furnished all the necessary information within the short time afforded to it to prove the genuineness of its purchases. Being aggrieved, the Revenue took the matter in appeal before the Tribunal. While dismissing the appeal, the Tribunal again noticed that the salaries to these two ladies were paid from year to year basis in the past but no such disallowance was ever made; no new feature had been brought on record by the Assessing Officer in the present assessment year, justifying deviation from the earlier conclusions. As regards the second issue, the Tribunal noted that the assessee had maintained complete quantitative record with regard to purchase of the items which were doubted by the Assessing Officer. Ev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the expression has been explained in various pronouncements. Recently, in Santosh Hazari v. Purushottam Tiwari [2001] 251 ITR 84 (SC) dealing with an analogous provision contained in section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, and while observing that the phrase "substantial question of law" is to be understood as something in contradiction with technical, of no substance or consequence or academic merely, their Lordships of the Supreme Court, after considering a number of decisions on the point reiterated the test laid down by the Constitution Bench in Sir Chunilal V. Mehta and Sons Ltd v. Century Spinning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd., AIR 1962 SC 1314 for determining whether a question of law raised in a case is substantial question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... words, if the Tribunal acts on irrelevant materials and evidence, a question of law is involved." Applying the above tests to the facts in hand, we are of the view that no question of law, much less a substantial question of law is involved in the present case. As noticed supra, both the authorities have recorded concurrent findings of facts that the said expenditures were incurred by the assessee for the purposes of its business and similar expenses had been allowed in the past. The said findings are essentially findings of fact. A question of fact may become a question of law in three situations enumerated above. Though it is pleaded that the order of the Tribunal is perverse inasmuch as its findings are not based on cogent material, b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
