AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (4) TMI 226
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t A.O.P.?" The facts of the case as emerging in the order passed by the Tribunal are as under :- The matter relates to the assessment year 1982-83, in which the Income Tax Officer, while assessing the respondent disallowed continuation of registration of assessee and assessed the assessee as association of persons on protective basis. The finding of the Income Tax Officer in the year 1978-79 were that the business of the assessee belongs to another firm M/s Abhay Kumar Jaswant Kumar. The income of the assessee was clubbed with that of M/s Abhay Kumar Jaswant Kumar and the assessee was assessed on protective basis in the status of A.O.P. In appeal the AAC following the order of Tribunal dated 13.9.1982 in I.T.A.No.744/Ind/81 relating to th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... deed of partnership dated October 21, 1976. The application for registration was filed on March 21, 1977. The constitution of the said partnership firm was shown as below : (1) Shri Mithalal, Karta, representing the 35 per cent share HUF styled as "Mithalal Chhaganlal" (2) Smt.Pyaribai W/o Mithalal 30 per cent share (3) Smt.Pushpabai W/o Abhayakumar 30 per cent share (4) Shri Ashok Kumar S/o Mithalal 5 per cent share The ITO noticed that there was already in existence a firm styled as M/s Abhayakumar Jaswantkumar, Indore. It was assessed by another ITO at Indore. The partners and their shares are as under : (1) Shri Mithalal, in his individual capacity 35 per cent share. (2) Shri Chhaganlal, father of Shri Mitha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....came to the conclusion that no genuine firm styled as "Mithalal Ashok Kumar" came into existence. He held that this entity is only a branch business of the firm already existing, namely, M/s Abhayakumar Jaswant-kumar. The ITO completed the assessment of the assessee in the status of an "AOP" as a protective measure. He further held that the income of the assessee will be included in the assessment of M/s Abhayakumar Jaswantkumar. Against the order of the ITO, the assessee went up in appeal before the AAC who examined the matter in detail and upheld the order of the ITO. According to him, the two lady partners were benami for their husbands. 3. The assessee went up in further appeal before the Tribunal, before whom it was argued on behalf o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....umstances under which we have committed a wrong or an error in deciding the appeal. In our opinion, the mistakes committed are apparent from the record. In view of the aforesaid facts, we set aside our order and accordingly order is set aside. The appeal shall be heard again and the same shall be discussed after hearing the parties. Since the matter has become very old, the Assistant Registrar is directed to fix the hearing of the appeal as early as possible" 5. Thus, the Tribunal set aside their own order dated January 15, 1982, and directed that the appeal which had been decided and disposed of on January 15, 1982, shall be reheard. Accordingly, the Tribunal allowed the miscellaneous petition. The Revenue, therefore, submitted an applic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onsider earlier has come to a conclusion that the assessee-firm was a genuine firm. This is purely a finding of fact and in such a situation, no question of law as such arises and, in this connection, reference may be made to the decisions in CIT vs. M. P. Bidi Leaves & Company (1983) 144 ITR 487 (MP); India Cements Ltd. vs. CIT (1966) 60 ITR 52 (SC); ClT vs. Chander Bhan Harbhajan Lai (1966) 60 ITR 188 (SC); Sir Shadilal Sugar & General Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (1982) 30 CTR (All) 257 : (1983) 141 ITR 664 (All); Chimanlal Umaji vs. CIT (1980) 121 ITR 507 (MP) and Shri Paramanand Bhai Patel and Smt. Jyotsna Devi Patel vs. CIT (1984) 41 CTR (MP) 323 : (1984) 149 ITR 80 (MP). In this connection, the learned counsel for the assessee also invited our....