TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1985 (7) TMI 145
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in deleting the addition of Rs. 10,085 representing interest paid by the assessee-firm on the capital contributed by Shri Rameshwar Dass, partner in spite of clear provisions of s. 40(b) of the IT Act, 1961." 2. In the course of assessment proceedings, interest paid to Rameshwar Dass Yoginder Mohan HUF in sum of Rs. 10,085 was added back. The said action of the ITO was reversed by the AAC when....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n (1980) 126 ITR 654 (Guj), deserves to be reviewed. He cited in the case of Chhotalal & Co. vs. CIT (1985) 44 CTR (Guj) 149 : (1984) 150 ITR 276 (Guj)(FB). 4. The ld. counsel for the assessee Mr. H.K.L. Bajaj, on the other hand, submitted that the issue is covered against the Revenue by earlier decision of the Chandigarh Bench and also as per Gujarat High Court decision in CIT vs. Sajjanraj Diw....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ade in the case reported in CIT vs. Sajjanraj Divanchand (1981) 21 CTR (Guj) 26 : (1980) 126 ITR 654 (Guj) for the reason we have explained herein. We think that that decisions has necessarily to be overruled." Then, the summarise, their Lordships have held that: "Once we accept the situation that contracting partner alone are bound by the terms of the contract and it is open to the Revenue to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....available on the issue which goes against the assessee, earlier decision of the Tribunal has to be reviewed and the issue decided in favour of the Revenue. We are, therefore, unable to confirm the action of the AAC. We are persuaded to have a different view then before because of Full Bench decision in Chhotalal & Sons vs. CIT (1985) 44 CTR (Guj) 149 : (1984) 150 ITR 27 (Guj) whch overrules earlie....