9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (11) TMI 125X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e evidence - Tribunal found that the explanation was required to be secured from the directors about stock position on date of visit – Tribunal’s finding is a finding of fact so no question of law arise – penalty set aside - 57/2006 - - - Dated:- 16-11-2006 - RAJESH BALIA and GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS, JJ. [JUDGMENT].- 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. 2. This appeal is directed ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Accountant an employee of the respondent assessee. Otherwise as on the date when the factory premises were visited by the authorities i.e. on 10 th Sept., 1994 and 12 th Sept., 1994, no statement of any person present at the premises was recorded. The statement of Amrit Lal Nirmal was recorded on 17 th Sept., 1994 i.e. after 5 days of the visit. 4. While levy of penalty was affirmed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce the entire matter was based on the statement of Shri Amrit Lal Nirmal, we directed by order dated 17.10.2006 to place on record the statement of Shri Armit Kumar recorded on 17.9.1994 as the same was relied on by the respondents as admission of valuation of provisions relating to stock. 6. Having perused the statement of Amrit Kumar Nirmal, it is apparent that he only stated what has happen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
