CIT Vs. MADHYA PRADESH TYRES CO.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal, filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act against an order dated 24 -8 -2005, passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short called 'Tribunal') in ITA No. 454/Ind./1999. This appeal was admitted for final hearing on following two substantial questions of law: 1. In absence of any discussion much less finding rendered by the Tribunal, whether Tribunal was justified in upholding the view taken by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the issue involved?

(2.) WHETHER interpretation made by the authorities of the circular issued by CBDT for working out the liability of the partners in relation to Section 40(b)(v) of the Act is legally sustainable so as to give benefit to the assessee of Section 40(b)(v)? 2. Heard Shri R.L. Jain, learned senior Counsel with Ku. V. Mandlik, learned Counsel for the revenue and Shri S.C. Bagadia, learned senior Counsel with Shri D.K. Chhabra, learned Counsel for the assessee.

(3.) WE have purposefully quoted in extensio and in verbatim the manner in which issue urged before Tribunal by revenue came to be 'judicially decided' by the Tribunal. We are at a loss to know as to what the Tribunal actually decided in this case. We can only know the submission of parties and conclusion of their decision 'against the revenue' but not the reasons for coming to such conclusion at least in its real judicial sence. Reasons are not there because they are somewhere else and probably in the order passed by Tribunal in earlier year case. In such situation, how do we know those reasons for examining them on merits as an appellate court as to whether those 'so -called reasons' exists or not and secondly whether they are legally sustainable, or not and whether those reasons influenced the Tribunal to dismiss the appeal.