9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (3) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that he arrived at a conclusion, primarily on imaginative basis and conjectures rather than on the basis of any record or books of account. The decision of the Assessing Officer was rightly upset by the Tribunal wherein it was clearly recorded that Ajit Kumar Dey had confirmed that he had purchased one stock exchange card of the Calcutta Stock Exchange Association Ltd. for a consideration of Rs. 50,000 and still the transaction had to be finalised and the payment was made on behalf of the assessee. This was the view taken even by the CIT (A) which has been rightly confirmed by the Tribunal. It is a settled principle of law that the Tribunal is the final fact finding forum and the High Court normally would not interfere in such findings. Fur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... while according to the (Assessing Officer), the value of the ticket might have been above Rs. 10 lakhs. The assessee was called upon to explain this entry. Finally, the Assessing Officer took the value of the ticket at Rs. 11,50,000/- and gave the benefit of Rs. 50,000/- paid by the assessee, added the balance income of Rs. 11 lakhs as unexplained investment expenditure and made addition thereto to the income of the assessee. Further penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act were also initiated against the assessee. Upon appeal by the assessee, the Commissioner of Income-tax, deleted the addition of Rs. 11 lakhs as well as granted the following relief to the assessee: "I have examined the contentions of the assessee' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ge Association Ltd. was only Rs. 50,000/- through Shri Ajit Kumar Dey of Calcutta. This was the only consideration paid by the assessee. In the absence of any cogent material placed on record, we are of the opinion that the decision of the Rajasthan High Court, supra, is not applicable to the facts of this case. We are in full agreement with the learned Authorised Representative that where no enquiry was conducted, factum of understatement of investment not proved and hence the provisions of section 69B are not applicable. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and consideration of this case, we decline to interfere in the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)." 3. This resulted in filing of the present appeal un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cting Anandi Nath Dutta to appear before him and produce relevant record in regard to the receipt. The bare reading of the order of the Assessing Officer shows that he arrived at a conclusion, primarily on imaginative basis and conjectures rather than on the basis of any record or books of account. The decision of the Assessing Officer was rightly upset by the Tribunal wherein it was clearly recorded that Ajit Kumar Dey had confirmed that he had purchased one stock exchange card of the Calcutta Stock Exchange Association Ltd. for a consideration of Rs. 50,000/- and still the transaction had to be finalised and the payment was made on behalf of the assessee. This was the view taken even by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) which has b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
