9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (8) TMI 25X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssets on dissolution of the firm ? (b) If question No. 1 (a) above is answered in favour of the Department and against the assessee, whether the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 26,385 made by the Income-tax Officer and upheld by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on account of lesser price charged from the partners ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal acted on relevant material in deleting the additions of Rs. 17,052 and Rs. 14,268 made under section 40A(3) and 40A(2)(a) respectively of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 3,000 made by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de of an amount of Rs. 26,375. The Commissioner of Incometax (Appeals) affirmed the Income-tax Officer's order. On further appeal by the assessee, the Tribunal observed that the remaining quantity of coke belonging to the firm at the time of dissolution of the firm really formed part of the firm's assets and, therefore, its distribution among the partners was a distribution of the assets and not, in substance, sale of the coke. On this view, the addition made of Rs. 26,385, treating the distribution of the remaining quantity of coke between the partners as sale to them, was deleted by the Tribunal. The Tribunal also allowed certain deductions which had been disallowed by the Income-tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tly not referred by the Tribunal since they also involve only questions of fact, in the present case. The deletion of disallowance of Rs. 3,000 towards expenses on entertainment is based ultimately on a question of fact. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that there was no basis to disallow the assessee's claim to this extent. It is difficult to appreciate what principle of law is involved in the decision of this question on the facts and circumstances of the present case. It is, therefore, question of fact in the present case. With regard to questions Nos. 1 and 2, which were referred by the Tribunal, learned counsel for the Revenue contended that the requisite findings were not given by the Tribunal to hold that the circumstances j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
