9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 454X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact that amounts were withdrawn from bank, the Respondent-Assessee had claimed the withdrawal were for refund to its clients, yet in fact, these amounts withdrawn from the bank were not refunded to its clients. However, as these refunds were not claimed as an expenditure and/or reduced from its income to arrive at the taxable profits, addition of the same is not justified. As the decision of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner of Income Tax? 2. The RespondentAssessee was subjected to a search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the said Act). Thereafter, on 31st December, 2007 the Assessing Officer passed an order under Section 143(3) r/w Section 153A of the said Act. The Assessing Officer while passing the assessment order dated 31st December, 2007 found that during the subject ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l aspects of the case, the view of the Assessing Officer was a possible view to the effect that bogus refund had not been claimed as expenditure while returning its income, no occasion for adding the same can arise. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal held that the exercise of jurisdiction by the Commissioner of Income Tax was not proper. Further, on merits, the Tribunal held that though it i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it to tax. On facts, the Tribunal held that for the subject assessment years no occasion to add the amounts claimed as refund (bogus) can arise. 5. In these circumstances, as the decision of the Tribunal is on a finding of fact, we see no reason to entertain the proposed question of law for the subject Assessments Year 2000-01 and 2001-02. 6. Accordingly, both the appeals are dismissed with no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
