9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (11) TMI 79X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 85. The Income-tax Officer treated the appellant as a trader and not a commission agent. In appeal, the matter was remanded by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) with certain directions. On remand the Income-tax Officer, asked the appellant to establish that it was acting as a commission agent and not as a trader. The appellant supplied the list of parties for whom it had acted as a commissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h reasons the scope for enquiry has been reduced, now. In my opinion it was rather arbitrary to treat the appellant as a dealer in respect of outside U.P. parties who did not appear before the Assessing Officer while accepting him as an 'arhatiya' in respect of those who appeared before the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer did not get any enquiry done from the said 'arhat market'. Therefor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctions on commission basis without any material brought on record by the appellant. We have heard Shri Shakeel Ahmad, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri A.N. Mahajan, learned standing counsel for the Revenue. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant was acting only as a commission agent and it has given the name and addresses of the parties with whom it had transact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the Income-tax Officer was perfectly justified in drawing an adverse inference against the appellant and holding that it acted as a trader in respect of the transactions which have not been proved by it in the capacity of a commission agent. The findings recorded by the authorities are based on appreciation of evidence and material on re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
