9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (10) TMI 19X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad materials to come to the conclusion that the company, Kalpaka Tourist Home (Pvt.) Ltd., was not the owner of the property, for the assessment of property income ? (3) Whether the Tribunal was right and had materials to fix the proportion of annual letting value at seven-eighth in the hands of the assessee and his wife ?" The respondent is the Revenue. We are concerned with the assessment years 1976-77 to 1979-80. In April 1970, the assessee and his wife purchased a plot of land on which there was an old building. The old building was pulled down. Thereafter, a hotel building was constructed thereon company was floated by name "Kalpaka Tourist Home (Pvt.) Ltd." which was incorported on March 13, 1972. The construction of the hotel bui ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee as also counsel for the Revenue. The company, Kalpaka Tourist Home (Pvt.) Ltd., claimed depreciation in respect of the building for the assessment year 1977-78 for which the accounting period ended on March 31, 1977. It was disallowed by the assessing authority holding that the company was not the real owner of the property. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) concurred with this view. The Tribunal confirmed the decisions of the authorities below. The company came up before this court in I.T.R. No. 162 of 1984 (Kalpaka Tourist Home (Pvt.) Ltd. v. CIT [1988] 172 ITR 364). The question referred to this court was whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in disallowing the claim of depreciation of the applicant-company in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and circumstances in paragraphs 9 and 10 of its appellate order dated May 24, 1985, and after calculation of the relevant details came to the conclusion that the assessee and his wife should be taken to have seven-eighth share in the property income and the assessee herein should bear five-sixth portion and his wife one-sixth. The finding aforesaid is a pure finding of fact, based on material. It is not open to interference by this court, in exercise of its advisory jurisdiction. Therefore, we answer question No. 3 in the affirmative, against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. The income-tax references are answered accordingly. A copy of this judgment under the seal of this court and the signature of the Registrar will be forwa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
