9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (11) TMI 59X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of Rs. 2,66,360 on account of cash credits by holding that the assessee was not supposed to prove the source of loans because that could not be said to be within his special or exclusive knowledge ? " The assessee derived income as a commission agent in coal. He sold wagons and coal rakes of the third parties and charged commission. Search and seizure operations at the business and residential premises of the assessee took place on June 13, 1985, under section 132 of the Act. A return of income was filed by the assessee in the status of an individual on January 16, 1987. During the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1986-87 (accounting year ending March 31, 1986), the Assessing Officer noticed the following cash credit e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as to accommodate and help the assessee. The Tribunal, however, noticed that the confirmation letter had been duly filed and Ishwar Chand was also subsequently examined by the Commissioner of Income-tax during the appellate proceedings wherein Ishwar Chand confirmed the loan to the assessee. A sum of Rs. 37,000 had been advanced by Ishwar Chand to the assessee on March 14, 1986, and the second amount of Rs. 30,000 was given on March 19, 1986. Both the payments were made by account payee cheques. The money was returned by the assessee to Ishwar Chand with interest amounting to Rs. 2,399 on July 22, 1986, by account payee cheque. A copy of the bank account of Ishwar Chand was also filed. On these facts, the Tribunal rejected the finding of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... years. He was also examined by the Commissioner of Income-tax during the appellate proceedings and therein he had admitted to have advanced money to the assessee. The loan was returned by the assessee to Rajinder Prashad with interest by account payee cheque on August 13, 1986. A copy of the bank account had also been filed. On these facts, the Tribunal took the view that it was only a case of suspicion that the credit entry had been treated to be bogus and fictitious whereas the facts brought on record did not justify the suspicion. From the facts, as discussed above, there appears no question of law arising from the Tribunal's order. The finding of fact given by the Tribunal is based on the material on record. The Tribunal correctly to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
