COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. GHEWAR CHAND KANUGA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In respect of the assessment year 1976-77, the following two questions have been referred for the opinion of this court, one at the instance of the Revenue and the other at the instance of the assessed:

(2.) Since the answers to the questions are concluded by a decision of this court following the decision of the Supreme Court, we dispense with the filing of the paper book.

(3.) In so far as the question referred at the instance of the Revenue is concerned, it may be noticed that the Tribunal has found that the amounts of Rs. 1,50,000 each in the case of Bharat Kumar and Manoj Kumar and Rs. 1 lakh in the case of Kumari Pushpa were transferred from their capital accounts and credited to separate fixed deposit accounts and has concluded that had there been no intention to treat them as separate loans, there was no necessity of any such transfer. In this view, the Tribunal has come to the conclusion that interest on these deposits cannot be said to be income arising directly or indirectly to the miners from their admission to the benefits of the partnership in the firm of Maharashtra Metal House and such interest, Therefore, cannot also be assessed in the hands of the assessed u/s 64(1)(iii).