2004 (4) TMI 521

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng Officer found a claim of Rs. 1,49,239 towards expenses incurred on travelling. However, on deeper scrutiny, he found that certain amounts out of this have been spent towards making payment of Diners Club. According to the CIT(A), assessee has agreed for making a disallowance of such payments. However, a dispute remained regarding the disallowance of Rs. 19,000 as expenses incurred on purchase of Air ticket from Vadodara to Bombay and Bombay to Ahmedabad. The assessee has contended that these tickets were purchased for undertaking business trips. However, according to Assessing Officer, the assessee failed to substantiate its claim by documentary evidence. He, therefore, disallowed a sum of Rs. 19,000. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) found that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t be a working partner. According to the Assessing Officer, the Kartas represent their respective HUF and they are not partners in their individual capacity. Therefore, they cannot be said to be working partners and accordingly remuneration could not be paid to such partners. The ld. CIT(A) deleted this disallowance. 6. At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that the issue is squarely covered in favour of assessee by the decision of ITAT Ahmedabad Bench "B" rendered in ITA No. 2072/Ahd./1999 for assessment year 1993-94 in the case of Krishna Ceramics v. ITO wherein the Tribunal has allowed the payment of remuneration to HUF partners. He placed on record the copy of the Tribunal's order. Apart from this decision,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fined in the Indian Income-tax Act as well as in the Excess Profits Tax Act, but it is not juristic person for all purposes. When two kartas of two Hindu undivided families enter into a partnership agreement the partnership is popularly described as one between the two Hindu undivided families but in the eye of law it is partnership between the two kartas and the other members of the families do not ipso facto become partners. There is, however, nothing to prevent the individual members or one Hindu undivided family from entering into a partnership with the individual members of another Hindu undivided family and in such a case it is a partnership between the individual members and it is wholly inappropriate to describe such a partnership a....