ASSTT CIT Vs. INDUSTRIAL LINING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal under Section 260a of the Income Tax Act, 1961, order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on 19th November, 1998, in I. T. A. No. 3849/ahd/93 for the Assessment Year 1986-87, is under challenge. At the time of admission, following substantial question of law came to be framed, as suggested in the memo of appeal :-"whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the provision of Section 40 (b) of the Act was applicable in relation to (a) salary amounting to Rs. 42,000/- paid to Shri N. R. Shah and (b) consultation fee of Rs. 12,000/- paid to Shri V. R. Shah in their individual capacity though each of them was a partner in the assessee firm in his capacity as Karta of his HUF. "

(2.) WE have heard learned Advocate, Mr. P. M. Parikh, for the appellant. The respondent, though served with the notice of admission, has chosen not to contest this appeal.

(3.) LEARNED Advocate, Mr. Parikh, submitted that identical questions had arisen in earlier Income Tax References relating to the same party bearing I. T. Reference No. 66 of 1992 and I. T. Reference No. 74 of 1990, decided on 20th November, 2002 and 16th June, 2003, respectively. He has placed on record xerox copy of the said orders. Those orders came to be passed while relying on decision of this Court in the case of National Wire Manufacturing Company v. Commissioner of Income Tax, as reported in 253 ITR 496.