9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (7) TMI 12X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the Incometax Officer when he was making original assessment was whether loans of Rs. 8,15,000 shown in the books of account of the respondent were genuine or not. Out of this amount, a sum of Rs. 3,00,000 was standing in the name of one B. J. Mehta and Rs. 5,15,000 in the name of ten other parties. The Income-tax Officer disbelieved the contention of the assessee that the amounts were gen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Incometax Appellate Tribunal. The stand now taken by the assessee was that even if the amount of Rs. 8,15,000 was considered as an income from undisclosed sources, the same was taxable in the hands of an association of persons because there was a joint venture entered into by the assessee with Lalji and Co., of Bombay and Maharaj Kumar Pratap Singh of Alwar. It may here be stated that, even ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been filed. Mr. Bishamber Lal also contends that the Tribunal directed the Incometax Officer to ascertain whether there was a joint venture or not This may be so, but the question arises whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to issue such a direction and, therefore, interpretation of section 254 is involved. In our opinion, important issues arise in the present case and a question of law, as pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
