COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. HEERA LAL BHAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Sandeep Bhandawat for the Revenue applicant and Mr. Suresh Ojha for the respondent- assessee.

(2.) BOTH these applications under S. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to (as the Act of 1961), which pertain to the asst. yr. 1994-95, have been filed at the instance of the Revenue seeking mandamus to the Tribunal for drawing up statement of case and to refer the following common question for the opinion of this Court :

(3.) IT is next submitted by the learned counsel for the Revenue Mr. Bhandawat that the Tribunal has erred in law in not appreciating the fact that the proviso to S. 44AD(2), which allows deduction of salary and interest paid to its partners, refers to computation of income made under S. 44AD(1) whereas the assessment was finalised under S. 44AD(5). The proviso has no application to the assessment completed under S. 44AD(5).