9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 674X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appeal has been admitted on the following substantial questions of law vide order dated 25.02.2009: "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the appellant is not entitled to the deduction of the freight amounting to Rs. 19,83,445/- and (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the appellant is not entitled to the deduction of the sum of Rs. 11,37,018/- in respect of purchase made from Neelam Minerals?" 3. We have heard Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/assessee and Ms.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the responde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... He further confirmed that he had no business transaction with the assessee M/s. Oren Hydro Carbons Pvt.Ltd." 5. The above finding will clearly show that the assessee failed to establish that they had incurred expenses towards freight and transportation. The Commissioner of Income- Tax (Appeals) -IV, Chennai, (hereinafter referred to as 'CIT(A)') reversed the finding of the Assessing Officer based upon the copies of crossed demand drafts issued in favour of V.Venkata Subba Reddy @ V.Subba Reddy. In our considered opinion, mere production of crossed demand drafts was not sufficient to establish the stand taken by the assessee. When the Assessing Officer was able to establish that there was no such person or transport company, the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent/revenue placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2015) 378 ITR 0640, wherein the Supreme Court held that there was no reason to reverse the finding of the fact particularly since nothing has been shown to conclude that the finding of fact was perverse in any manner whatsoever. It was further held that if the finding of the fact arrived at by the Tribunal were to be set aside, a specific question regarding a perverse finding of fact ought to have been framed by the High Court and in the said case, it was noted that the Revenue did not seek for framing of any such question. In this regard, the Supreme Court referred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
