9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (2) TMI 43X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to as "the Act"). The facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as under: On January 16, 1997, search and seizure operations were carried out by the officers of the Income-tax Department at the business premises of H. P. Dhanuka Plastic Chem Private Limited, M. I. Road, Jaipur, and the residential premises of Plot No.361, Mahaveer Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur, as also at the reside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an, residing and carrying on business in Nepal and, therefore, not amenable to assessment and payment of income-tax in India. However, the assessment of undisclosed income of the appellant was scaled down to Rs. 58,72,939. Against the order of the Commissioner Income-tax (Appeals), the appellant preferred an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (in short "the ITAT"). An appeal was also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellant were all illegal and without authority of law. The contention is devoid of any force. Section 132(1)(c) of the Act authorises search and seizure if there is reason to believe that any person is in possession of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing and such money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing represents either wholly or partly income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich might not have been disclosed or would not be declared. The other questions raised were about the addition of certain income, allegedly of some other persons, as undisclosed income of the appellant. These are purely factual questions and not questions of law. The question as to whether the appellant was a non-resident Indian or not, is also essentially a question of fact. Only because there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
