9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (8) TMI 336X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... K., JJ JUDGMENT This income-tax appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short the "Act") preferred by the appellant Revenue against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur (for short "the Tribunal") has been admitted on June 19, 2009 on the following substantial questions of law : "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed and hundis and FDRs worth Rs. 18,35,000 were found. The assessee admitted that source of investment on hundis and FDRs is out of the concealed income and offered for taxation. During the course of hearing, the assessee submitted that the promissory notes/hundis found in the locker was only to the tune of Rs.18,35,000 and not Rs. 27,43,000. The assessee submitted that promissory notes belonged t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... him to Raipur for signing the promissory notes, but he could not go to Raipur due to his ill health and after his recovery from illness, when he contacted the respondent herein, the respondent informed him that promissory notes were misplaced and thereafter since there was no need of money, he never approached the assessee for the same. 3. The Assessing Officer did not accept the explanation o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were about Rs. 18,35,000 and all of them did not belong to the assessee but they belonged to the family members as well and the Assessing Officer accepted this fact. Further, none of the promissory notes are signed by any of the employees and under these circumstances there is no reason to disbelieve the assessee's explanation that the amount was not given as it was not signed by the proprietor o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
