Oswal Trading Co. vs Commissioner of Income Tax

G.G. Sohani, Actg. C.J.

The order in this case will also govern the disposal of M. C. C. Nos. 106, 107, 108, and 109 of 1986.

These are all applications u/s 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

The material facts giving rise to these applications, briefly, are as follows : The assessee claimed to be a partnership firm and applied for registration. After enquiry, the Income Tax Officer came to the conclusion that the assessee-firm was not a genuine firm, but was carrying on a part of the business carried on by another firm in the name of Ghasiram Kaluram. The assessee was, therefore, refused registration. The order passed by the Income Tax Officer was upheld in appeal. On further appeal before the Tribunal, the Tribunal upheld the finding given by the Income Tax Officer. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Tribunal, the assessee sought reference, but as the application made by the assessee in that behalf was rejected, the assessee has made these applications.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we have come to the conclusion that the following question of law does arise out of the order passed by the Tribunal :

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was material before the Tribunal for coming to the conclusion that the assessee-firm was not a genuine firm, and whether the finding of the Tribunal in that behalf was perverse ?"

The Tribunal is directed to state the case and to refer the aforesaid question of law to this court for its opinion. In the circumstances of the case, the parties shall bear their own costs.