Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 2645 2002 SLD 2645 (2002) 256 ITR 659
Punjab and Haryana High Court

JAWAHAR LAL GUPTA AND ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, JJ.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Sohan Lal

v.

Commissioner of IncomE tax

Law:

Section:

Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credits - Assessment year 1988-89 - Assessee claimed that certain amount advanced by 'R' to different persons, had been returned by borrowers to assessee who, in turn, credited same to R's account - Tribunal observed that persons to whom 'R' had allegedly advanced amount were not known to him, that date of making advance had also not been disclosed and that no interest was charged despite fact that 'R' did not know any one borrowers - Whether in this situation Tribunal had correctly come to a finding of fact that said transaction could not be believed, and there was no ground to interfere with - Held, yes FACTS For the assessment year 1988-89, the assessee claimed that certain amount advanced by one 'R' to different persons, had been returned by those borrowers to the assessee who had, in turn, credited the same to R's account. The Assessing Officer, however, made addition which was cancelled by the Commissioner (Appeals). On revenue's appeal, the Tribunal restored the addition made under section 68. On appeal under section 260A : HELD According to the Tribunal, the persons to whom 'R' had allegedly advanced the amount were not known to him. The date on which the amount was advanced had also not been disclosed. No interest was being charged despite the fact that 'R' did not know any one of the eight persons. In this situation, the Tribunal had come to a finding of fact that the transaction could not be believed. Nothing had been pointed out to show that this finding was wrong. Resultantly, there was no ground to interfere with the impugned order. The appeal was to be dismissed. Suvir Sehgal for the Applicant. R.P. Sawhney and Rajesh Bindal for the Respondent. ORDER Gupta, J. - The assessee has filed this appeal with the grievance that the Tribunal has erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 61,000 to the income declared by the assessee in the return for the assessment year 1988-89. 2. Mr. Sehgal, the learned counsel for the appellant contends that the order passed by the…
🔒
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