9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (11) TMI 100X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... without considering the evidence filed by the assessee before the authorities, the assessment was bad in law and that it should be annulled. Another ground taken was that where the ITO proposed certain additions and referred the matter to the IAC under s. 144B, the IAC remanded the matter to the ITO suggesting almost enhancement of income, which according to the assessee was not legal and permitted by s. 144B nor within its contemplation. The Commissioner(A) after looking into the record felt that the assessment made by the ITO should be set aside. He directed the ITO to make a fresh assessment after making a fresh reference to the IAC under s. 144B and that the IAC should give a fresh opportunity to the assessee to consider the points cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come up in appeal objecting to the relief granted by the Commissioner(A) on other counts but that appeal was not taken up with these appeals because there was nothing common between those points and the points involved in these appeals. 3. Now since the Commissioner(A) has set aside the assessment pursuant to which another assessment was made by the ITO against which another appeal was filed by the assessee, nothing turns out by going into the question as to whether the Commissioner(A) was justified in setting aside the assessment or not even though arguments were addressed to us that the Commissioner(A) was not justified in setting aside the assessment. After realising the futility of pursuing that appeal the ld. Chartered Accountant, ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the reason that the assessee's representative has not pressed, this appeal I.T.A. No. 827 (Del) of 1984 stands dismissed. 4. Taking the other appeal as we have pointed out there are only two grounds urged, one was about the disallowance of the commission and the other was about the disallowance of bad debts. In so far as the commission is concerned, it is a commission paid in the course of business to a party called M/s Talreja & Company. This claim was disallowed by the ITO without giving any reason whatsoever while the Commissioner(A) disallowed it on the grounds that though it was claimed to have been paid, for doing liaison work for exports & imports, no evidence was produced. But it is now pointed out that this payment of commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g been discharged in any manner, the claim for the allowance of bad debts was not entertainable. The Commissioner(A) also referred to certain decisions of theBombay,Calcuttaand Madras High Courts in support his view. 6. It is now to be seen whether there is any evidence that the assessee has produced in support of the claim or whether there were only mere averments or aversions. Copies of accounts of all these parties were furnished to us in the paper book which were also furnished before the ITO. There's no dispute on the question that these are debts coming for the past 5-6 years carried forward in the books of account. The ITO mentioned in his order at one place that these are not trade debts but the Commissioner(A) corrected the ITO by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as recoverable but not recovered, then the disallowance could have been made or sustained but inspite of the request made by the assessee to call for those parties, the ITO did not oblige. It was pointed out that even now if one more opportunity was given, the assessee would be able to lead evidence before the ITO to show by producing that party as to how that amount became irrecoverable. Similarly, he pointed out that in respect of M/s Thakur Das Nand Lal of the same address, he would be able to prove that a sum of Rs. 14,450 has also become time bashed by producing the party. There are two or three other parties of the same address and the submission made was more or less the same. But the Departmental Representative strongly objected to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t out and take such action against the assessee for making such a wilful attempt. But if the evidence produced is such that it is not fabricated and lead to the conclusion that the debts had become irrecoverable, it should not be the aim of the Revenue to impose tax on items which do not constitute the income of the assessee. We do not, therefore, see any prejudice to the interests of the Revenue by giving the assessee one more opportunity. With this end in view, we set aside the order of the Commissioner(A) in so far as these two points are concerned and direct him to examine these points afresh by permitting the assessee to produce those parties and then decide the issue. The Commissioner(A) would also give the ITO an opportunity to exami ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
