9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 19X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 30.11.2009. Though the work was done in or around 1996-97, the sales remained to be accounted. However, the sum was not taxable in the relevant assessment year. No substantial question of law for our consideration - Income Tax Appeal No. 1368 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 23-6-2015 - M. S. Sanklecha And N. M. Jamdar,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr Arvind Pinto For the Respondent : Mr P J Pardiwala, senior counsel with Atul Jasani ORDER P.C. 1. This appeal by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), challenges the order dated 14 December 2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The assessment year involved is 2006-07. 2. The basic grievance of the revenue is that on the fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s were made available. The assessee company has not filed statement of bank account of M/s.X-Ray Accessories Mfg. Company, an associate concern of assessee where a credit for inward remittance of ₹ 75,01,065/- is appearing on 15.4.1999. assessee has filed Ledger Account of M/s.X-Ray Accessories Mfg. Company. From the ledger account, it is seen that an amount of ₹ 65,66,686/- has been transferred to the assessee company's account on 31.3.2000 for the reason that the same was received by them on assessee's behalf from HI-TECH TRADING OMAN. The same has been shown as credit to the account of HiTech Trading Company as on 31.3.2000 by assessee in its books account. This credit continued in the books of account from 2000 to 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... med by M/s.Hi-Tech Inspection Services LLC, Oman vide their letter dated 30.11.2009. Though the work was done in or around 1996-97, the sales remained to be accounted. However, the sum was not taxable in the relevant assessment year. 5. The revenue carried the issue in appeal to the Tribunal. However, in view of the remand report of the Assessing Officer, the Tribunal found no reason to disturb the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to the extent of deletion of ₹ 64.29 lacs is concerned. 6. We find that the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as the impugned order of the Tribunal proceeds on the factual report of the Assessing Officer that the amount of ₹ 64.29 lacs is not chargeable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
