1984 (12) TMI 49

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... as many as 18 questions before the Tribunal. The application was rejected as per order dated February 11, 1981. The assessee filed an application under section 256(2) claiming reference of four questions which are set out in paragraph 12 of the application. It is submitted in the prayer that the Tribunal should be directed to state a case regarding these four questions. A preliminary objection has been raised on behalf of the Department that these questions are not the ones mentioned in the application under section 256(1) and, therefore, the application should be rejected. It is submitted by Mr. K. K. Wadhera that not only should the questions arise out of the Tribunal's order but they must also be first sought from the Tribunal by mea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... discussion for us to hold that the application has to be confined to the case set out before the Tribunal at the stage of its application under section 256(1). However, we have not come across a single case in which a completely different set of questions were raised at the stage of an application under section 256(2). This is an unique and an unprecedented case. We can dismiss the application on this short ground, but we think, we should examine whether there is a question of law which could be referred on merits. It so happens that the 18 questions set out in the application under section 256(1) which were raised before the Tribunal are almost all questions of fact. The only real controversy before the income-tax authorities was wheth....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and the balance by the other four persons. The property situated at 1, South End Road, New Delhi, which belonged to the second party was to be treated as the partnership property. It appears that no permission was ever obtained for building the hotel nor were any steps taken in this behalf except to write some letters and to consult some persons. In fact, the whole project ended in a dissolution within three months. The Tribunal has given an elaborate order as to whether there is a genuine partnership or not. It may be mentioned that as a result of the dissolution, the partnership property which formerly belonged to Shri Kanhaya Lal Sawhney, Shri Puran Chand Sawhney, Shri Man Mohan Sawhney and Shri Chander Mohan Sawhney, became the property....