9911796707
TMI Blog1981 (4) TMI 42X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar in question ? " The material facts giving rise to this reference briefly are as follows : The assessee is a firm and the assessment year in question is 1976-77. For the assessment year 1975-76, the assessee was registered as a firm consisting of the partners, Smt. Gangabai and Rameshchandra. Subsequently Smt. Indrabai, wife of Shri Rawaldas, brother of Rameshchandra and son of Smt. Gangabai, partners of the firm, was also introduced as a partner in pursuance of a deed of partnership executed on 21st November, 1974, and registration was sought for this firm. One of the clauses of the deed of partnership required contribution of capital by all the partners and in pursuance of this clause, Smt. Indrabai as alleged to have contributed a su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 85(1) of the Act, the firm could not be held to be genuine. In this view of the matter, the Tribunal set aside the order passed by the AAC and restored the order passed by the ITO. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Tribunal, the assessee submitted an application for making a reference to this court and it is at the instance of the assessee that the aforesaid question of law has been referred to, this court for its opinion. Learned counsel for the assessee contended that the Tribunal had given contradictory findings and that the finding about the benami character of Indrabai given by the Tribunal was based on no evidence. It was further contended that the Tribunal had dealt with the matter very superficially and it was a fit case where ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er partner to the Income-tax Officer in the prescribed manner. " The aforesaid provision is attracted in the instant case in view of the findings of the Tribunal that Indrabai, a partner of the firm, was a benamidar of her husband, who was not a partner of the firm, and that the other partners, namely, the brother and the mother of Indrabai's husband, knew or had reason to believe that Indrabai was benamidar of her husband and that they had not communicated that fact to the ITO. In view of these findings, the Tribunal rightly held that by virtue of the provisions of the Explanation to s. 185(1) of the Act, the firm could not be held to be a genuine firm. The contention that the findings given by the Tribunal are contradictory is not well ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
