TMI Blog1989 (7) TMI 337X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1972-73, the following question of law has been referred to this Court: Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was not carrying on any business and, therefore, its status was as an AOP? 2. The facts are that for the assessment year 1972-73 in respect of its previous year ended Dewali 1971 the assessee submitted it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... existence of a partnership firm presupposes the existence and carrying on of a business he took the status of the assessee as that of an AOP. 3. The assessee being aggrieved by the said order of the ITO appealed to the AAC. The AAC found that the partners of the assessee-firm had entered into an agreement to carry on business as Estate Agents for land development, acquisition, etc., and held th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection while expenditure shown therein was on electric charges, rates and taxes, salary and wages, sub-lease rent and interest. He observed that it could not be stated from the said accounts that the assessee had carried on any business activities. According to him, the assessee had done nothing except realisation of rent and done some minor development work involving investment of ₹ 46,000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty of the assessee was only to collect rent. The Tribunal has found that the assessee was not carrying on any business. The finding, although challenged, the question was not allowed. Thereafter the assessee did not come to this Court under section 256(2). 8. On the facts found by the Tribunal we are of the view that the Tribunal has come to a correct conclusion. Since there was no business, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
