TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 268X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... artner, was to the effect that it was Sri.Jabir who was running the business and even deciding the price of the wooden furnitures that were sold. All these factual findings contained in the order of the Tribunal would therefore indicate that Sri.Jabir was a person who was actively involved in the business and was competent to depose about the business activities of the firm. It may be true that the Managing Partner was not confronted with the contents of the statement made by Sri.Jabir. But having regard to the law laid down in Narayan Bhagwat Rao Gosavibalajiwale v. Gopal Vinayak Gosavi & Others [1959 (9) TMI 53 - SUPREME COURT] relied on by the Tribunal, which lays down that the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Income Tax Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee being aggrieved by the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench in ITA.Nos.125/11 and 126/11, concerning the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 respectively. 2. We heard learned counsel for the assessee and the senior counsel for the Revenue. 3. The assessee is a partnership firm. It originally declared loss for both the years under reference. Search under section 132 of the Income Tax Act was carried out in the business premises as well as the residential premises of the partners and books of accounts and other documents were seized. Notices under section 153A of the Act were issued and in response thereto, the assessee filed return on 20.1.2009, declaring loss of ₹ 16,75,385/- for both the ye ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtners on their capital and salary to the working partners. 5. During the hearing of the appeals, the contentions were reiterated by the learned counsel for the assessee. In so far as the first question relating to the statement of one of the partners recorded under section 132(4) is concerned, it was the contention of the assessee that the person whose statement was recorded is one Jabir who is a 22 year old son of the Managing Partner. According to the counsel, he was only a student and was not involved in the business and that therefore, his statement, which was not a corroborated one, should not have been acted upon. However, we find from the order passed by the Tribunal that the statement recorded under section 132(4) was attested b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... capital and salary to the working partners. First of all, it is the conceded case of the assessee that they have not raised any such claim either before the assessing officer or before the first appellate authority. The order of the Tribunal also give an impression that such a claim was raised only when the matter was argued. Secondly, this claim could not have been considered by the Tribunal in the absence of any supporting document, including the partnership deed. The fact that issues relating to sale of branded items and bulk sales are remanded for fresh adjudication by the assessing officer does not mean that the Tribunal should have, as contended by the counsel for the assessee, remitted this claim of the assessee also to the assessing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
