9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 361X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2,00,000, made to wife of a deceased partner of the firm. 3. Brief facts relating to aforesaid issue are, the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the profession of Advocates, Solicitors and Notaries. The assessee, for the year under consideration, filed its return of income on 26th November 2014, declaring total income of Rs. 4,31,05,490. The Assessing Officer processed the return of income under section 143(3) of the Act determining the assessee's income at Rs. 4,51,18,241, against the declared income of Rs. 4,31,05,490. The Assessing Officer, on a perusal of the audit report, found that an amount of Rs. 12 lakh, was paid to Smt. Maneck Jahangir Garat, who is the wife of the deceased Partner of the assessee firm Shri Jahangir Ga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... revious year spread over 72 months equally and the some has been paid as per the clause 12:4 of the partnership deed dated 22.06.2006. The appellant also contended that its case was squarely covered by the ratio of the decision laid down in the case of jurisdictional Bombay High Court (CIT v/s. Mulla and Mulla and Craigie. Blunt and Caroe (190 ITR 198)). However the learned A.O. has not appreciated the facts of the case and added the sum of Rs. 72,00,000/- to the income of the appellant firm. Aggrieved by the said addition the appellant has filed the present appeal before your honour's. The contentions of the appellant firm are as under: Mrs. Maneck J. Gagrat, wife of the deceased partner Mr. J. Gograt, was paid Rs. 72,00,000 during T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee disallowed the claim of the assessee by following the order dated 4th March 2015, passed by the Tribunal in assessee's own case in Gagrats v/s. ACIT, ITA No. 1885/Mum./2012, A.Y. 2008-09, wherein the Tribunal has dismissed the assessee's appeal by deciding the issue in favour of the Revenue. The assessee being aggrieved is in further appeal before Tribunal. 6. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted before us that Rs. 12 lakh was paid to the wife of the deceased partner of the firm Late Shri Jahangir Garat, which was spread for 12 months equally during the previous year and the same has been paid as per Clause-12:4 of the Partnership Deed dated 22nd June 2006. In support of his contention, he relied upon the dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
