LILADHAR RAMSUKH DAS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE assessee-applicant seeks reference of the following questions of law under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :

(2.) WE are informed by counsel for the applicant, since an earlier reference application filed by the assessee before the Tribunal pertaining to a typographical mistake was allowed and a direction was issued in favour of the assessee amending the said mistake, hence the relief which the petitioner seeks through questions Nos. 4 and 5 stands decided in favour of the assessee. Therefore, he does not press for calling questions Nos. 4 and 5.

(3.) THE further contention is that the assessee has filed certain evidence in the form of credit and debit notes, which are annexure 4 and they pertain to the commission to Messrs. Vishwanath Balkrishna founded on the agreement, which is also subsisting for the year in question and thus the Tribunal should have taken into consideration and should have called the said questions for the opinion of this court. THE argument is misconceived. We find that the said debit and credit notes do not pertain to the relevant year in question as is involved in the present application. Even reliance on the agreement which is dated November 9, 1980, is only for a period of three years, hence the relevancy of the agreement is only for a part of the assessment year in question. However, even if an agreement was subsisting for a part, it is for the assessee-applicant to show on the basis of evidence to claim commission and as we have held above, the credit and debit notes do not pertain to the year in question. Thus, we do not find any illegality with the order passed by the Tribunal. No question of law arises out of the said Tribunal's order.