INCOME TAX OFFICER Vs. GOPI CHAND
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Click here to view full judgement.
P.S. Dhillon, Judicial Member -
(1.) THE revenue has preferred this appeal against the order dated 15-12-1977 of the AAC, Range I, Agra ; who allowed the appeal against the order dated 4-11-1976 of the ITO, Mainpuri.
(2.) In this appeal, the revenue has contended that the AAC has erred in law and in facts in holding that the interest income received by the minors from the firm in which they have been admitted to the benefits of the partnership could not be added to the income of the assessee ; that the AAC erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 5,840 made by the ITO to the income of the assessee, representing interest received by the minors from the firm in which they had been admitted to the benefits of partnership and thereby added that the order of the AAC being erroneous in law and facts be set aside and that of the ITO be restored. He relied upon the order of the ITO and the cases reported in L. Ram Narain Garg v. CIT  55 ITR 435 (All.), Bayang Lal v. CIT  77 ITR 309 (All.), CIT v. Rukmanand Kedia  69 ITR 557 (All.) and S. Srinivasan v. CIT  63 ITR 273 (SC).
On the other hand, Shri Jain, the learned counsel for the assessee, contended that the impugned order is justified and merited no interference.
(3.) WE have heard the rival contentions and submissions and gone through the record before us.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.