TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1969 (7) TMI 16
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uthorities below?" The facts appearing in the statement drawn up by the Tribunal, so far as relevant for decision of the point, are as hereunder. Narasinghmal, Premchand and Pokhraj constituted a partnership in the name and style of "Narasinghmal Premchand" under a partnership deed dated January 25, 1948. In the said firm, Narasinghmal, Premchand and Pokhraj had 6 annas 3 pies, 5 annas 3 pies and 4 annas 6 pies shares, respectively, and the said firm had been granted registration under section 26A of the Income-tax Act, 1922, for the assessment years upto 1959-60 inclusive. For the assessment year 1960-61, registration was claimed on the basis of an application dated May 18, 1959. It was stated that a new deed of partnership was drawn up ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....led more than 6 months after the constitution of the firm. The assessee went up in appeal, and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner maintained the order refusing registration only on one ground, namely, that a genuine firm had not been in existence on the basis of the deed dated November 12, 1958. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner's conclusions were mainly based upon the declaration made by one of the partners in the renewal application for the registration under the sales tax department. Upon further appeal to the Tribunal, the views of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner were accepted and registration was refused. Thereupon, the assessee applied for a reference to this court, and the Tribunal has made the reference of the question qu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ive, is decisive of the matter unless successfully withdrawn or proved erroneous: Narayan Bhagwantrao Gosavi v. Gopal Vinayak Gosavi. In this case the assessees had taken no steps either to explain the circumstances, under which the declaration in the renewal application was made, nor did they lead evidence to prove and establish that the statement contained in the said declaration was erroneous. In the circumstances, therefore, there was no material placed before the revenue to help them to conclude that the statement contained in the renewal application was erroneous and did not indicate the true state of affairs existing on March 2, 1959. Mr. Mohanty, appearing for the assessee, contended that, even if there was no partnership in existe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uced in this case that the partnership was not in existence and the deed of partnership was a bogus transaction. As I have said the question at issue is a question of fact and the High Court has no jurisdiction to interfere with the finding of the Tribunal on such a question." The self-same view seems to have been adopted by the Supreme Court in Ladhu Ram Taparia v. Commissioner of Income-ta', where the court came to hold that whether a genuine firm was in existence during a particular year did not give rise to a question of law. In the circumstances, it cannot be said that a question of law really arose from out of the appellate Judgment of the Tribunal in this case. Under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the advisory jurisdic....