9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 372X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1. This is an appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal), dismissing the appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 2. The appellant invites the Court to consider the following questions of law : (a) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessee firm is a genuine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... artnership dated 23rd July, 1997. A Consortium Agreement dated 20th January, 1997, was entered into between Ray Constructions Limited, Bhageeratha Engineering Limited and a firm trading in the name and style of Ray Constructions. The consortium adopted the name Ray-Bel Consortium. The consortium was formed for the purpose of preparing and submitting a tender invited by the Maharashtra Industrial D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deed dated 23rd July, 1997. The respondent's partners were - the said Bhageeratha Engineering Limited, Ray Constructions Limited and the four individuals who were the partners of Ray Constructions. 5. The return was processed under section 143(1)(a) and a refund of Rs.96,13,075/- inclusive of interest was determined to be payable. The refund was, however, withheld under section 241 with the prior ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unreasonable. Accordingly, both the appellate authorities held that the amount paid by the respondent to the partners thereof pursuant to sub-contracts entered into between the respondent and the partners could not be said to be excessive or unreasonable. 8. In the facts of the present case, we are not inclined to interfere with the concurrent finding of the appellate authorities as we find that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
