9911796707
TMI Blog1960 (8) TMI 105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, Rangaswami, was styled the working partner. That the assessee had to borrow for financing the business of the partnership firm and that he had to pay interest on such loans were never in doubt. The figures were set out in paragraph 7 of the statement of the case. The first question referred to this court under section 66(2) of the Act raised the issue, whether the assessee was entitled to dedu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he loans had not been borrowed for the business. In Mool Chand v. Commissioner if Income Tax the Hyderabad High Court dealt directly with the claim to deduct payments of interest and upheld that claim. 2. The learned counsel for the Department conceded the position, that in such cases, interest payments are lawfully deductible in computing the income of a person like the assessee who was a part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dy, outside the usual working hours, the books, cash and the key of the firm. That was provided for in clause (5) of annexure A . 4. The finding of the Tribunal was that there was no evidence on record that the assessee took any active part in the business except signing cheques. 5. It is on this basis that we have to answer the second question, whether the assess was entitled to earned inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... forthcoming. The Tribunal was certainly justified on the material place before it in coming to the conclusion, that the assessee had not satisfied the requirements of section 2(6AA) of the Act. The second question is answered in the negative and against the assessee. 6. Since neither side has succeeded wholly on this reference, there will be no order as to costs. Order accordingly. - - Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
