9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (9) TMI 1113 - HC - Income TaxUnexplained cash credit under Section 68 - ITAT deleted the addition - Held that - There cannot be any doubt about the transaction as has been observed by the Assessing Officer. The transactions were as per norms under controlled by the Securities Transaction Tax, brokerage service tax and cess, which were already paid. They were complied with. All the transactions were through bank. There is no iota of evidence over the above transactions as it were through d-mat format. - Decided against revenue
Issues:
Challenge to Tribunal's order deleting addition made by Assessing Officer as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Analysis: The High Court of Calcutta heard an appeal against the Tribunal's judgment related to the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07. The main question raised was whether the Tribunal's order was perverse in law and facts in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal, after considering the material and hearing, found that the transactions in question were genuine. The transactions were conducted through a d-mat account, following all relevant norms and regulations, including payment of taxes and compliance with banking procedures. The Tribunal concurred with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in accepting the transactions as genuine. The High Court noted that the concurrent fact-finding by both the Tribunal and the Commissioner of Income Tax supported the authenticity of the transactions, making the allegation of perversity unfounded. The High Court emphasized that it could not re-appreciate the fact findings since they were supported by both the Tribunal and the Commissioner of Income Tax. The Court highlighted that the appeal was based on the same point as a previous appeal, which was dismissed due to decisions rendered on identical points. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the current appeal, affirming the Tribunal's decision. All parties were directed to act on a signed photostat copy of the order as per usual undertakings.
|
