- (1.) THE Tribunal has raised the following question of law under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for opinion to this Court. The question is as follows : "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee's claim for the remuneration of Rs. 12,300 paid to his wife Smt. Indu Agarwal was allowable and was not to be clubbed in the hands of the assessee, under s. 64(1)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961 -
(2.) THE assessee is an individual. For the asst. yr. 1977 -78 in question he returned an income of Rs. 26,130 besides agricultural income of Rs. 5,000. The assessee paid Rs. 12,300 as salary to his wife Smt. Indu Agarwal @ Rs. 1,025 per month in view of her professional knowledge and experience. However, it was disallowed by the ITO under s. 64(1)(ii) and s. 40A(2). The assessment was completed by the ITO accordingly by disallowing Rs. 1,704 out of car expenses, Rs. 5,000 out of miscellaneous expenses, Rs. 801 paid to various associations and clubs and Rs. 675 as subscriptions and donations. The agricultural income was also enhanced to Rs. 17,500.
(3.) CEILING case (Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 73 of 1977) and to ascertain the facts regarding the land actually held by the assessee. He set aside the assessment to be made afresh after considering the objections raised on behalf of the assessee in the grounds of appeal. The assessee, being still aggrieved, came up in further appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that based on its decision for the asst. yr. 1972 -73, the assessee's claim for remuneration paid to his wife Smt. Indu Agarwal was setting aside the assessment order of the ITO in other respects for framing it afresh, he was not justified in remitting the claim as to remuneration paid to Smt. Indu Agarwal which he could himself decide without any further enquiry. Thus, the Tribunal modified the order of the AAC to this limited extent while confirming his order in other respects.;