TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (7) TMI 43
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase, the Tribunal was correct in upholding the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner cancelling the order of the Income-tax Officer passed under section 104 of the Income-tax Act ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that all the persons counted as one by the Income-tax Officer are not relatives of one another in terms of section 2(41) and, therefore, such persons cannot be grouped as one person under clause (ii) of Explanation 1 to section 2(18) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the sons, and grand children of Shri V. P. Gupta were not relatives of Shri D. R. Gu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; 45,000 (ii) Daulat Ram Public Trust Education Society 10,000 (iii) The 20 members of the Gupta family and two Trusts (Sl. No. 1 to 22) 65,080 (iv) Shareholdings belonging to the group of S.N. Gupta &nbs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....luded. If this was done the remaining holdings of the five biggest groups do not equal to 50 per cent. of the voting power. The Revenue carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal for the assessment year 1962-63 where findings were recorded by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Two contentions were raised before the tribunal by the Revenue. The first was that even if the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was right in his interpretation of it relative" the assessee-company would still be within the pale of section 104 and therefore the analysis made was erroneous. The said contention was rejected by the Tribunal. It was observed that the classifications made by the Revenue were hot correct. For, while D. R. Gupta, his wife and sons we....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aken before the Tribunal was reiterated before us. There is no appearance on behalf of the assessee when the matter was called. In order to appreciate the stand of the Revenue, it is necessary to quote sections 2(18) and 2(41), as it stood between April 1, 1962 and April 1, 1965, which read as follows : "2. (18) a company is said to be a company in which the public are substantially interested----. . . (b) if it is not a private company as defined in the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), . . . (iii) the affairs of the company, or the shares carrying more than fifty per cent. of its total voting power were at no time during the relevant previous year controlled or held by five or less persons . . . (ii) persons who are relatives of one a....