1. Dispute regarding whether the salary of an assessee was paid by a domestic entity or a foreign company. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
1997 Supreme(SC) 1677
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Suhas, C. Sen, Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, APPELLANT
Versus
S. R. PATTON, RESPONDENT.
Civil Appeal No. 307 of 1993,
decided on December 16, 1997.
Important Points
The court upheld the finding of the Tribunal as a pure question of fact, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Subject
Taxation Law - Salary Payment
Act Referred
Headnote
Salary Payment - Taxation - The court held that the salary of the assessee was paid by the foreign company M/s Davy Powerage Inc. and not by FACT, based on the finding of the Tribunal. This influenced the court's decision in favor of the assessee.
Fact of the Case:
The Tribunal found that the salary of the assessee was not paid by FACT but by the foreign company M/s Davy Powerage Inc.
Finding of the Court:
The court upheld the finding of the Tribunal, stating that it was a pure question of fact and had not been challenged on the ground of perversity. The appeal was dismissed in favor of the assessee.
Issues: The main issue was whether the salary of the assessee was paid by FACT or by the foreign company M/s Davy Powerage Inc.
Ratio Decidendi: The finding of the Tribunal regarding the payment of the salary was upheld by the court, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed in favor of the assessee, with no order as to costs.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether the Tribunal correctly determined that the assessee's salary was paid by a foreign company rather than a domestic entity. (Para 1 )
3. The court observed that the issue is a pure question of fact and, absent a challenge on perversity, the Tribunal's finding must be accepted as correct. (Para 2 )
4. Findings of fact by a Tribunal are to be accepted as correct unless they are challenged on the grounds of perversity. (Para 2 )
5. Appeal dismissed with no order as to costs. (Para 4 )
6. When is a Tribunal's finding of fact binding on a higher court?
A Tribunal's finding of fact is taken as correct if it has not been challenged on the ground of perversity. (Para 2 )
ORDER
1. The basic question in this case is :
"(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the salary of the assessee was not paid by FACT but by the foreign company M/s Davy Powerage Inc. ?"
2. This is a pure question of fact. The finding of the Tribunal has not been challenged on the ground of perversity. The finding will have to be taken as correct. Therefore, the answer to this question must be in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee.
3. In view of our answer to Question 1, the other questions raised in this case need not be answered.
4. The appeal is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
