9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (2) TMI 53X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made by this court in Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 303 of 1985 (see [1989] 175 ITR 309), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore, has under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short " the Act "), referred the following question of law to this court for its opinion : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ine firm has come into existence in conformity with the terms and conditions of the instrument of partnership. He, therefore, vide his order dated December 7, 1981, refused to grant registration. The assessee went in appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner who, however, upheld the decision of the Income-tax Officer, vide his order dated April 23, 1983. The assessee then came up in the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer is confined to the ascertainment of the facts, (i) whether the application for registration is in conformity with the Act and the Rules, and (ii) whether the firm shown in the document presented for registration is a bogus one or has no legal existence. Under the Indian Income-tax Rules, 1922, an application for registration had to contain a recital that the partners certified that the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ine because there was a mistake in the matter of distribution of profits. The mistake, however, appeared to be bona fide inasmuch as it was rectified on November 15, 1982, by making an adjustment entry. We find that the Tribunal did not accept the situation as mistake as a result of repetition of mistakes. In our view, this was not the correct approach. The fact remains that the assessee immediate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve intent. In the result, we find that the Tribunal was not justified to label the partnership as ungenuine and pass the order on that basis. Our answer to the question referred to this court by the Tribunal is, therefore, against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. We, however, make no order as to costs of this reference. Counsel fee for each side is fixed at Rs. 750, if certified. A copy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
