9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 196X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d share application money & cash credit – no nexus is established that share application money for augmenting the investment in business has flown from assessee’s own money, hence not assessable in hands of assessee - 35 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 6-4-2007 - JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. 2. The following two questions are stated to be substantial questions of law aris ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7 ITR 582 (Cal) while approving the decision of the CIT (A) in rejecting the books result?" 3. So far as question no.1 is concerned, it is stated by learned counsel for the appellant that the issue embedded in the said question has already been decided by this Court and governed by the ratio laid down in Barkha Synthetic's vs. Asst. CIT case [2005]197 CTR 432; [2006] 283 ITR 377. It ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in. 4. So far as question no.2 is concerned, it is finding of fact and no question of law is involved. 5. The Assessing Officer has rejected the books of account of the assessee and resorted to best judgment assessment. In arriving at best judgment assessment the Assessing Officer took the basis of applying G.P.by estimating the turn over of the assessee at 1.5 times than what was declare ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er. 7. The Tribunal on considering entirety of facts affirmed findings of CIT (A) in this regard. 8. The best judgment itself is based on estimate and cannot be scaled at exactitude. We do not find any question of law involved in this case. The circumstances considered by the CIT (A) in substituting its opinion are not irrelevant consideration for the purpose of estimating income of the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
