9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (9) TMI 29X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rule 29 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, filed in paper book (virtually permitting the assessee to make out completely a new case) though this evidence was never presented before or considered by the lower authorities and without giving the Income-tax Officer an opportunity, to estimate the evidence? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the income in question was business income or income under other sources in the absence of carrying on business for the assessment years 1979-80 to 1981-82?" During the relevant assessment years, the assessee-company was doing business as dealers and exporters in tobacco. During the accounting periods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he entire evidence on record including the additional evidence adduced by the petitioner recorded its finding in the following words: "From the above, we hold that it was the intention of the assessee to treat the demised premises as well as the assets of the assessee-company as its business assets throughout the period of lease and it had never abandoned the idea of resuming its business after finding favourable atmosphere. Now, the question remains whether leasing out the commercial assets for a period of 12 years would by itself amount to abandonment of its business. Firstly, we have to hold that the assessee never abandoned its business. It was purchasing tobacco and selling it, of course without grading and processing it in a small w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erusing the reasoning of the learned Tribunal and the grounds stated by it in support of its conclusion and in the light of the judgment of the apex court in CEPT v. Shri Lakshmi Silk Mills Ltd. [1951] 20 ITR 451, we do not think that the finding recorded by the Tribunai on the mixed question of fact and law is perverse or based on "no evidence". It is trite that the Tribunal under the Act is the final fact-finding authority and the fact-finding recorded by it cannot lightly be interfered with unless the court finds that the finding is ex facie erroneous and not supported by any evidence. That is not the situation in this case. Equally, we do not find any flaw on the part of the learned Tribunal in permitting the petitioner to adduce additi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
