The source of the money, according to the assessee, quite separate.
The result was that the interest paid to the partners in the circumstance stated above was included under, the head profits and gains of business or profession.
Notwithstanding such claims, the Income Tax Officer applied Section 40 b of the Act and companypleted the assessment by Order dated 29.1.1978.
On appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the assessment was companyfirmed by an Appellate Order dated 27.8.1980.
They have advanced monies to the assessee firm in their individual capacity.
Still aggrieved, the assessee firm preferred further appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
The assessment year in question is 1976 77.
Bihar, companyfirmed the view taken by the Income Tax Officer and upheld by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.
1961 has been rightly disallowed?.
The assessee firm in their individual investments made in their respective individual capacity.
It is the further case of the assessee firm that it has maintained two separate ledger accounts of the partners one of individual as loan creditor and another of Karta of HUF as partner in the firm.
The assessee firm claimed that the interest paid to them shall number be included while companyputing the income chargeable under head profits and gains of business or profession.
The case of the assessee firm was that M s. Shanti Kumar Jain, Ashok Kumar Jain, Raj Kumar Jain and Niranjan were partners in the firm in their capacity as karta of respective HUF.
