9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (12) TMI 61X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o transfer of any capital and hence the assessee is ineligible to claim the same as capital loss. We find that the view of the Tribunal that the assessee has not suffered any loss when it received the sum of Rs. 30,000 at the time of retirement is perfectly in order and we do not find any question of law, much less a substantial question of law, warranting interference by us in the order of the Tribunal. - - - - - Dated:- 18-12-2002 - Judge(s) : N. V. BALASUBRAMANIAN., K. RAVIRAJA PANDIAN. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by N.V. BALASUBRAMANIAN J.-This appeal is preferred against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal passed in I.T.A. No. 1673 (Mad) of 1989 dated March 26, 2002. The assessee is a partner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal. The appellant has preferred this appeal. We heard Mr. R. Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant. We find that the Appellate Tribunal has considered the question in the proper perspective. The assessee admittedly has contributed a capital of Rs. 30,000 and it also retired from the partnership firm. It is axiomatic that during the subsistence of the partnership firm, no partner can claim to own any property of the firm as his own even to the extent of his profit sharing ratio. The assessee has retired and the new partner was admitted in his place. The net wealth of the capital should have been ascertained after taking note of the assets and liabilities of the firm and on that basis alone, the assessee's share in the firm was deter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al gains. Here, we are concerned with a converse case where the assessee's share was determined after taking note of the assets and liabilities of the firm and the liabilities of the firm have already been adjusted and then the amount of Rs. 30,000 was determined to be paid to the assessee. Further, when the assessee claimed that the losses incurred should be considered as capital loss, it overlooked that it has taken into account the assets of the firm. On an ultimate analysis, the Tribunal has found that on settlement of the accounts the assessee was entitled to a sum of Rs. 30,000 which has been received by it also. Therefore, it is impermissible for the assessee to claim that the losses which were already adjusted should once again be c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
