Case Details

Citation(s)
1979 SLG 1289 1979 SLD 1289 (1979) 120 ITR 633
Calcutta High Court
IT REFERENCE No. 416 OF 1973, JULY 7, 1978
DIPAK KUMAR SEN AND C.K. BANERJI, JJ
R.N. Bajoria and S.K. Bagaria for the Applicant. Subhas Sen and Ajit Sengupta for the
Respondent

Premier Suppliers (P.) Ltd

v.

Commissioner of IncomE tax

Law:

Section:

Section 68 of Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credits - Assessment year 1965-66 - In respect of certain cash credit found in assessee's books of accounts ITO examined concerned creditor - Said creditor deposed that his books of account were in Department's possession - He further stated that though some of his transactions were bogus, yet to best of his memory his transactions with assessee were genuine - ITO rejected his evidence and made addition to assessee's income - Tribunal having noticed IAC's findings in penalty proceedings that creditor's account books in department's possession related to an earlier year, and having concluded that creditor was not sure about genuineness of transactions in dispute, upheld addition - Whether Tribunal had duly considered entire evidence adduced by assessee and had not ignored any relevant material - Held, yes - Whether IAC's order was relevant to controversy as it had been passed in penalty proceedings arising out of very same assessment - Held, yes - Whether, in such circumstances, Tribunal's finding that loan advanced by said creditor was not genuine, was correct - Held, yes FACTS The ITO having found a cash credit in assessee's books, examined the creditor who deposed that his books were in department's possession he admitted that certain transactions of his firm were bogus. He, however, stated that the transactions with the assessee to the best of his memory were genuine. The ITO held that the assessee had not proved the source of the cash credit, and thus, made addition. On appeal, the AAC confirmed the assessment. On second appeal, the Tribunal noted the IAC's finding in the penalty proceedings that the creditor's account books in the department's possession related to an earlier year and not to the assessment year in question. It was accordingly held that the explanation of creditor regarding non-production of account books was not correct. Further, from creditors deposition it was concluded that he was not sure whether the transaction in dispute was genuine or not. The Tribunal, thus, confirmed the addition made. On reference: HELD The Tribunal had duly considered the entire evidence adduced by the assessee and it…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492