RAO NARAIN SINGH Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FOUR statements of cases were submitted by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, relating to the assessment years 1964-65 to 1967-68 arising out of the assessments made in the case of the same assessee. In each case two questions have been referred for the opinion of this court as the same were questions of law arising out of the common order passed by the Tribunal in respect of four appeals separately filed for each assessment year. However, as the questions involved in all these cases were identical, except that the amount in respect of which deduction was claimed and disallowed is different in each case, on the same set of facts they were consolidated and registered as one I. T. Reference No. 2 of 1980. Instead of repeating the questions of facts of each case separately, we shall confine the reference to the statement of case in respect of the assessment year 1964-65.

(2.) THIS reference has been submitted at the instance of the assessee, who was unsuccessful in his claim for deduction in respect of different amounts paid during the previous years relevant to each assessment year to one Lehini Bai, widow of Binnumal. The assessee has claimed that the amount paid to Lehini Bai were the expenses incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of carrying on his business and were allowable as deduction in computing his income during each relevant assessment year.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the Revenue has urged that the basic premise for the contention advanced by learned counsel for the assessee is non-existent and therefore it cannot be accepted inasmuch as there is no evidence to support the basic premise nor is there a finding that these expenses related to retrieving of lost books of account which were retained in the possession of the widow of Shri Binnumal but it was a simple case of repayment of a debt to Smt. Lehini by the respondent which was disputed by him.