9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (2) TMI 134X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee's accounts and the assessee was not prepared to disclose the source of its receipt, the natural presumption would be that the assessee was the owner of the entire money. - Assessee failed to prove that the money does not belong to him and hence, the authorities were right in assessing u/s 69A - - - - - Dated:- 11-2-2006 - Judge(s) : P. D. DINAKARAN., P. P. S. JANARTHANA RAJA. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by P. P. S. JANARTHANA RAJA J.-The present appeals are filed under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by the assessee against the order passed in I. T. A. Nos. 1579 and 1580(Mds)/96 by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, "D" Bench, raising the following substantial questions of law. "1. Whether ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A of the Income-tax Act to the total income of the assessee. The first appellate authority had confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed an appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order of the lower authorities. We heard the counsel appeanng for the assessee. Admittedly, a sum of Rs. 2,04,27,106 was credited in six bank accounts maintained by the assessee at State Bank of India, Avanashi, Central Co-operative Bank, Avanashi and Primary Agricultural Co-operative Bank, Mettupalayam. The assessee through his father, Mr. Mariappa Goundar withdrew all the money just prior to the date of raid. Therefore, the assessee coul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee was not prepared to disclose the source of its receipt, the natural presumption would be that the assessee was the owner of the entire money. It was for the assessee, to prove that the money did not belong to him. The assessee failed to prove that the money does not belong to him and hence, the authorities were right in assessing under section 69A of the Income-tax Act. In view of the foregoing conclusions, we find no error in the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and it requires no interference. Hence no substantial questions of law arise for consideration of this court. Accordingly, the above tax case is dismissed. Consequently, the connected T. C. M. P. No. 45 of 2006 is closed. No costs. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
