9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (8) TMI 107X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is a registered firm. The Assessing Officer found that during the relevant year of assessment, it had transferred five flats in its building at Bandra to its five retiring partners. The book value of these flats had been shown at Rs. 23,93,260 and the retiring partners had altogether a credit balance of Rs. 10,01,097. The transfer was effected by debiting the partners' accounts. This resulted in total debit balance of Rs. 13,92,163 in the partners' accounts. Ultimately, this amount was not recovered from the retiring partners. In addition to that, one of the partners, viz., Shri M.J. Pherwani was also paid a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs. The Assessing Officer, therefore, opined that these transactions were in the nature of gift. He, therefore, subjec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urther, it is settled rule of interpretation that the provisions of the statute must be harmoniously interpreted and an interpretation should be avoided which renders the other provisions otiose. To support his contention, learned Departmental Representative relied on the following: (1) CGT vs. S.B. Sugar Mills (1979) 120 ITR 126 (All); (2) CIT vs. Bharani Pictures (1980) 14 CTR (Mad) 246 : (1981) 129 ITR 244 (Mad) and (3) A. Vimalan vs. CGT (1974) 94 ITR 21 (Mad). 4. Shri Dilip Dwarkadas, learned counsel for the assessee, appeared before us. It was contended that the flats in question were belonging to the partners and not to the firm. Our attention was invited on the arbitration award dt. 30th Jan., 1986, the relevant portion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , wherein it was held that a firm is not included in the definition of 'person' under s. 2(xviii) of the GT Act, 1958. 5. We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material placed before us and precedents relied upon. We have persued the various documents and materials filed before us at the time of hearing. We have gone through the arbitration award. It is true that in the said award, partners were treated as the real owners of the flats. But how the dispute cropped is not clear to us. Relevant details apropos the same were not filed. How the property was purchased? How the amount of purchase was reflected in the account? How it was treated as firm's property? How the dispute was referred to the arbitrator? How the firm claime ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
