9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (9) TMI 86X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the receipt of Rs. 11,82,520 was an ordinary trading receipt taxable under section 28 of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1973-74 ? In accordance with the order dated September 10, 1980, the Appellate Tribunal has submitted the statement of the case. The material facts are these. The assessee is a partnership firm and was a contractor who was awarded the work of cleaning the plant in the blast furnace and the work of coal-loading crane track in coke oven at Bhilai in August, 1957. The work was completed on January 1, 1980 (sic). However, disputes arose between the assessee and the Bhilai Steel Authorities which ultimately was referred to arbitration on June 5, 1962, by the assessee. The claim of the assessee was resisted by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arrying On the business during the relevant accounting year; (iii) that the assessee had claimed the benefit which was granted to it for the years 1965-66 onwards up to 1972-73 ; (iv) that the assessee was treated as a registered firm under section 184(7) of the Income-tax Act for all these years. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Tribunal, the assessee preferred an application under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act before the Tribunal who rejected the same. The assessee thereafter preferred an application to this court under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act and that is how the question noted above has been referred to this court for its decision. From the facts and circumstances as noted above, the real question which ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arguments advanced on behalf of the parties on either side, in our opinion, no question of law arises from the facts and circumstances of the case as stated in the statement of the case. The question whether the assessee was carrying on the business during the relevant assessment year is a pure question of fact and the Tribunal has recorded a clear finding that the assessee was carrying on the business during the relevant assessment year. Apart from this, it is seen that the assessee was treated as a registered firm and had also claimed deduction of expenditure during the assessment year 1973-74. This being a pure question of fact, the same cannot be gone into in this reference. In CIT v. Thakurdas [1984] 147 ITR 549, the Tribunal had reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
