9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (12) TMI 28X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in law in holding that the reassessments under section 147(b) of the Act are in order ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal misdirected itself in law and acted without evidence or in disregard of material evidence filed by the assessee in holding that the salary and maintenance expenses paid to Mr. Nicholas Sundaram was not allowable expenditure ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to several documents filed by the assessee, the Tribunal is justified in law in holding that the salary and maintenance expenditure incurred by the assessee on Mr. Nicholas Sundaram have been rightly disallowed ? 4. Whether the Tribunal's conclusion about the disallowance of s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned counsel for the Department submits that the issues are of facts and no question of law is involved. Though these tax cases petitions are filed referring eight questions of law, learned counsel for the petitioner argued only certain questions, which are being dealt with. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, so far as the first question is concerned, on material, the assessing authority has reason to believe that there are sufficient materials to reopen the case. The Tribunal has also found that there is material evidence on record. Under the circumstances, we fully agree with learned counsel for the Department that no question of law arises regarding reopening of the case under section 147(b) of the Act. Regarding the other ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o, in our view, no question of law arises. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that after completing his course, Nicholas Sundaram wanted leave but leave was sanctioned with a condition that he will not be paid salary. This argument is not acceptable in view of the fact that learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to substantiate that even after returning from abroad, Nicholas Sundaram worked in the company and was in the employment of the company. So far as the last question, question No. 8 is concerned, the Tribunal found that the depreciation is not allowable under section 37(4) on the building called guest house, but used by the assessee for the purpose of its business. This question need not be answered in vie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
