9911796707
TMI Blog1975 (9) TMI 58X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd constructing sheds and godowns for the purpose of storage of grain and fertilisers etc. and to let them out to Government agencies and others who ever might require them. According to the ITO the income from letting godowns is assessable under the head the head "property". The firm did not have any business during the year 1969-70 relevant to the asst. yr. 1970-71. Hence the ITO sought permission from the IAC for cancellation of the registration of the firm and after receipt of approval from the IAC, the ITO issued notice to the assessee asking to show cause as to why registration be not cancelled. The ITO further observed that s. 2(b) of the Indian Partnership Act 1932 defines business as every trade or occupation and profession. Though ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed without any business. But the ITO, not convinced with the plea of the assessee, cancelled the registration granted to the firm as according to him the main ingredient for operation of the partnership is the existence of business and the same was absent and as such the firm could not be said to have born. 2. In appeal the AAC observed that the contention of the counsel for the assessee are well founded and are fully supported by the assessment order of the ITO under s. 143(3) and the appellate order of the AAC Range, I Meerut, wherein it has been categorically held that the assessee firm was engaged in the business of hiring of lands, construction of sheds and godowns thereupon for being let out on rent and that its rental income had be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he section is very must limited as it refers to the genuineness of the firm only. Secondly the above ground involves investigation of facts and it is not referring to purely a question of law. In this view we reject the prayer of the authorised representative of the Department for its inclusion ground No. 3 of the grounds of appeal taken by the Department. Thus in the facts and circumstances of the case we do not see any merit in the appeal filed by the Department as there is no infirmity in the order of AAC and as such the order of the AAC is confirmed and the appeal filed by the Department is dismissed. This is so because the assessee firm did transact business during the assessment year under consideration. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
