9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 835X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt of salary / remuneration to Smt. Sharmila Dugar has not been disallowed. On the principle of consistency also the claim which was rightly claimed should not have been disallowed. So we find force in the submission of the Ld. AR Shri S. P. Bhati that the assessee Firm has rightly claimed the salary and remuneration to its partner Smt. Sharmila Dugar at ₹ 2.50 lakhs as provided for in amended supplementary deed dated 10.05.1996 and so, I direct the AO to allow ₹ 2.50 Lakhs claimed by the assessee Firm for salary/ remuneration to Smt. Sharmila Dugar. We direct the AO to allow the claim of expenditure in respect of remuneration/salary partner Smt. Sharmila Dugar. - I.T.A. No. 109/Gau/2020 - - - Dated:- 20-1-2021 - Shri A. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to Act ), the AO taking note of the clause 8 of original partnership deed (dated 01.07.1985) which is reproduced below denied the claim of the assessee in respect of payment of ₹ 2.50 Lakhs to Smt. Sharmila Dugar: That the lady partner shall not remain engaged in the day to day management and conduct of the business of the firm and she will not liable for any infraction o flaw of criminal nature committed by the male partner or any employee of the firm either knowingly or unknowingly and the partners hereto mutually agree to the said proposition. 3. Aggrieved the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who confirmed the action of AO. 4. Aggrieved the assessee is before me. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... increase or reduce the above remuneration and may agree to pay remuneration to other partners. The partners may also agree to revise the mode of calculating the above said remuneration as may be to by and between the partners from time to time. 6. I note that on the strength of the aforesaid amended clause 10 (supra), the Firm claimed salary and remuneration to its partners at ₹ 2.50 lakhs each. The AO/CIT(A) accepted the claim in respect of one of its partner Shri Sanjay Dugar, but did not accept the claim in respect of other partner Smt. Sharmila Dugar at ₹ 2.50 Lakhs citing clause 8 of original partnership deed (dated 01.07.1985) and without giving credence to the supplementary deed dated 10.05.1996 wherein it altered a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
