1979 (5) TMI 65

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... i.e. Shri P. Padmanabha Chettiar Shri. P. Balakrishnan, Shri P. Gopalakrishnan, and Shri P. Narayanan, and a minor Shri P. Subramaniam admitted to the benefits of partnership. The last four persons are the sons of Shri G. Padmanabha Chettiar Shri Padmanabha Chettiar was a partner in a firm M/s. M.R. Govindaswamy Chettiar & Sons as Karta of his joint-family. The aforesaid firm was dissolved on 13th April, 1969 and on the same date there was a partition in the family of Shri Padmanabha Chettiar. Consequent to that assets and liabilities of the erstwhile firm and he together with his divided sons became partners in the assessee firm. 3. Several amounts were due to the assessee firm from different persons. In so far as the outstandings are ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-73. The amount of interest receivable apparently remained the same because in relation to the accounts we have set out there was no change in the principal amounts outstanding in any of the assessment years under consideration. 4. The ITO had also disallowed certain interest claimed by the assessee as payable on due basis but not actually paid. 5. There were appeals to AAC and thereafter to the Tribunal and the Tribunal in the order already referred to upheld the inclusion of interest to the extent of Rs. 16,428 on the accrual basis. In the same order, the Tribunal stated that there was no warrant for disallowing interest payable on due basis though not actually paid and the Tribunal separately deleted amounts of Rs. 10,246 Rs. 7,600....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tually been accounted for by the assessee but by oversight at the stage of deciding the quantum appeal the matter was not represented from this angle before the Tribunal and the figure of Rs. 16,428 was left undisputed. Actually the assessee should have got credit for Rs. 1,320 (Rs. 1,200 plus Rs. 120) and only Rs. 15,108 would have been upheld. 11. For the accounting period ended 13th April, 1971 there were no interest receipts, i.e., relevant to the asst. yr. 1971-72. 12. For the accounting period ended 12th April, 1972 relating to the asst. yr. 1972-73 there was receipt of Rs. 1,200 again in respect of Pattabhi Chettiar. Here again the assessee should have got credit for Rs. 1,200. 13. The assessee put in a Misc. Petition seekin....