2007 (7) TMI 303

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as admitted for final hearing on the following two substantial questions of law: "1. In the absence of any discussion much less finding rendered by the Tribunal, whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the view taken by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on the issue involved ? 2. Whether interpretation made by the authorities of the circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes for working out the liability of the partners in relation to section 40(b)(v) of the Act is legally sustainable so as to give benefit to the assessee of section 40(b)(v)." 2. Heard Shri R. L. Jain, learned senior counsel with Ku. V. Mandlik, learned counsel for the Revenue and Shri S. C. Bagadia, learned senior counsel with Shri D. K. C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed that the year under consideration is the assessment year 1995-96 and as per the Board's circular referred to above, it has been mentioned 1993-94 to 1996-97 deduction for remuneration to a working partner may be allowed on the basis of clauses of the type mentioned. It is also contended before us that the payment of salary was not exceeding the limit prescribed under section 40 of the Income-tax Act. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, we uphold the findings of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). This issue has also been decided by this Bench in favour of the assessee in the assessee's own case in I.T.A. No. 436/Ind/1999 for the assessment year 1994-95. The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed." (emphasis 'suppl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ady arrived at in their main leading order in extenso in case if the Tribunal does not wish to add any more reasoning in their earlier order. In this case, the Tribunal has simply mentioned the number of appeal but has not even mentioned as to on what date, the order was passed in that appeal and what was their view which led for dismissal of the appeal filed by the Revenue ? In substance, what we mean to say is that those so-called reasoning which the Tribunal claims to have recorded in detail in their earlier order must be made available to us for examination as an appellate court for their sustaining or setting them aside. The only proper place for mentioning such reasoning is in the impugned order itself in verbatim in one paragraph. It....