TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1986 (5) TMI 12
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., at the instance of the assessee by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for answering the following questions: "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the validity of the assessment under section 143(3)of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholdin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the firm, held this could not lead to the conclusion that she was a bogus partner. He, therefore, held that the Income-tax Officer was not justified in refusing to register the firm. He directed the Income-tax Officer to grant registration to the firm. The Revenue filed an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal saying that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner erred in reversing the ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... firm directly, this question is not available to the assessee because the Tribunal was not called upon to examine the merits of the assessment made by the Income-tax Officer under section 143(3 )of the Act in the status of an association of persons. The Tribunal is called upon to examine the merits of the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, reversing the order of the Income-tax Officer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a firm is genuine or bogus or benami is a pure question of fact. Recently, the Rajasthan High Court, in Saraf Brothers v. CIT [1987] 166 ITR 414; [1980] 4 Taxman 104 (Raj), held Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961-Reference Question of law Tribunal refused to state a case as no question of law arose from its finding that the firm was not genuine and/or business of one firm was benami of an....