C. I. T. , Kolkata - X v. The Seller - 2014-LL-0925-48

Citation	2014-LL-0925-48
Appellant Name	C. I. T. , Kolkata - X
Respondent Name	The Seller
Court	HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	25/09/2014
Assessment Year	1998-99
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	partnership agreement
Bot Summary:	The Court : This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 10th March, 2005 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata in I.T.A.No. 1447/Kol/2004 for the assessment year 1998-99 on the following question: Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in allowing deduction of the partner s remuneration as per the provision under Section 40(b)(v) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 2 Heard Mr.Chowdhury, learned advocate for the appellant. The learned Tribunal affirming the order of the learned CIT(A) had held as under : I have carefully considered the rival submissions of the parties and perused the materials available on record including the decision and CBDT Circular No.739 dated 25.03.1996 relied on by the parties. From the reading of clause 8 of the Partnership Deed dated 26.03.1992 and clause 3 of the supplementary Partnership Deed dated 04.03.1993. I further find that after applying the percentage a specified in the Partnership Deed and Supplementary Deed, the amount of partners remuneration is ascertainable the CBDT Circular No.739 dated 25.03.1996 relied on by the Ld.D.R. is not applicable to the facts of the present case. During the course of hearing of the appeal the Ld.Counsel for the assessee has made a statement at Bar that no such disallowance has been made by the Assessing Officer in past in view of the same clause 8 of the Partnership Deed dated 26.03.1992. 3 In view of the specific finding of the learned Tribunal, in our view, no substantial question of law arises and therefore, the application and appeal are dismissed.

ORDER SHEET ITA 319 of 2005 IN HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF IONCOME TAX, KOL-X Versus SELLER BEFORE: Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 25th September, 2014. Appearance : Mr.R.K.Chowdhury, Advocate for appellant. Court : This appeal has been preferred by Revenue under section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 against order dated 10th March, 2005 passed by learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata in I.T.A.No.1447/Kol/2004 for assessment year 1998-99 on following question: Whether in facts and circumstances of case Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in allowing deduction of partner s remuneration as per provision under Section 40(b)(v) of Income Tax Act, 1961 ? 2 Heard Mr.Chowdhury, learned advocate for appellant. learned Tribunal affirming order of learned CIT(A) had held as under : I have carefully considered rival submissions of parties and perused materials available on record including decision and CBDT Circular No.739 dated 25.03.1996 relied on by parties. From reading of clause 8 of Partnership Deed dated 26.03.1992 and clause 3 of supplementary Partnership Deed dated 04.03.1993. I find that assessee has duly specified amount of each partners remuneration. I further find that after applying percentage specified in Partnership Deed and Supplementary Deed, amount of partners remuneration is ascertainable, therefore, CBDT Circular No.739 dated 25.03.1996 relied on by Ld.D.R. is not applicable to facts of present case. During course of hearing of appeal Ld.Counsel for assessee has made statement at Bar that no such disallowance has been made by Assessing Officer in past in view of same clause 8 of Partnership Deed dated 26.03.1992. In this view of matter and in absence of any contrary material brought on record by Ld.D.R. and also in light of decisions as relied on by Ld.Counsel for assessee, I am of view that there is no error in order of Ld.CIT(A) in allowing deduction of partners remuneration to assessee and in holding that there was no mistake apparent from record in terms of section 154 of Income Tax Act and accordingly, grounds taken by revenue are rejected. . 3 In view of specific finding of learned Tribunal, in our view, no substantial question of law arises and therefore, application and appeal are dismissed. Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to parties on priority basis. (SOUMITRA PAL, J.) (ARINDAM SINHA, J.) ssaha AR(CR) C. I. T. , Kolkata - X v. Seller

Metadata

Judgment